The anti-vax movement has been exposed for what it has always been, intellectually and ethically bankrupt.

And it has been exposed in the most spectacular fashion due to the Disneyland outbreak of measles simultaneously demonstrating that the empirical claims of anti-vax parents are nothing more than nonsense and that the practical effects of refusing to vaccinate your children involves putting other children at risk of serious disease and even death.

So should we expect a mea culpa, and admission acknowledging that anti-vax advocates have been wrong all along, duped by lack of basic knowledge about immunology, science and statistics and aided by gullibility in trusting folks like Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey?

Admitting one’s mistakes is not an ego boost, so there won’t be any admissions of thoroughly misunderstanding (or never understanding) the science behind vaccination, and there won’t be any expressions of regret about harming other people’s children.

What there will be is retrenchment, and as the Facebook post below demonstrates, Mayim Bialik shows us how it’s done.

Bialik writes, apparently with a straight face:

i [sic] would like to dispel the rumors about my stance on vaccines. i am not anti-vaccine. my children are vaccinated. there has been so much hysteria and anger about this issue and i hope this clears things up as far as my part.

We are a non-vaccinating family, but I make no claims about people’s individual decisions. We based ours on research and discussions with our pediatrician, and we’ve been happy with that decision, but obviously there’s a lot of controversy about it.

Children today get about four times as many vaccines as the average 35-year-old did when we were kids. Besides visiting the CDC website … here are the books we used to research each vaccine and discuss each with several doctors before deciding what was right for our family.

She follows this with recommendations for anti-vax books by two celebrities beloved in the anti-vax community, Mothering Magazine contributor the late Dr. Lauren Feder (primary care medicine, pediatrics and homeopathy) and super-quack Dr. Bob Sears.

Does Bialik think we are idiots and don’t remember that she declared hers to be a “non-vaccinating family”?

I doubt Bialik is thinking of us at all. She’s attempting damage control for her own ego, not her public image.

Bialik, like most anti-vaxxers in February 2015, now knows that she was utterly, spectacularly wrong about vaccination. She faces two choices; she could admit that she was wrong and learn from her errors. That’s what typically happens when people learn that they were wrong about some aspect of science. Or she could preserve her sense of self esteem by pretending that she was never wrong because hers was never a “non-vaccinating family.”

See, her children are vaccinated! Against what and how closely have they adhered to the CDC vaccination schedule? I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that while Bialik’s children are selectively vaccinated according to a schedule that she, or someone she admires, made up in defiance of the CDC.

No matter what happens, Bialik needs to feel that she is both “empowered” by making a personal choice, and not one of those “sheeple” who accept that the expert opinion of experts has more value that her idiosyncratic personal beliefs.

Bialik will not be the only one. We are all vaccinating parents now!

I predict that anti-vax celebrities and celebrity quacks are embarking on an about-face so fast that their heads will spin. That’s how they will protect their egos. Then it is only a matter of time before they settle on some other form of quackery in defiance of authority to demonstrate that they have done their “research” and are “empowered” by refusing to follow the recommendations of experts.

As I wrote last week:

When refusing to vaccinate your children is widely viewed as selfish, irresponsible, and the hallmark of being UNeducated, anti-vax advocacy will lose its appeal.

Did anyone see this vile post claiming the mother of Griffin, in Toronto Canada, made up her story to gain sympathy for pro-vaccine shills – namely her grandfather, who has stock in a pharmaceutical company?
A friend posted it proudly on her facebook status.
I have been rethinking the entire relationship since.

AutismDad is over there complaining Dr T banned him from here for all his truth telling.

Oh and he’s also complaining about the tone of pro-vaxxers over there, despite setting (and loving) a bit of low tone here.

They’re a weird mob.

Amy Tuteur, MD

I did ban him, not for any truth telling since he wasn’t telling the truth. I banned him for the way he addressed other commentors.

Who?

Quite. His particular brand of vulgarity was…special. And the veiled threats were not at all acceptable.

Nick Sanders

On the other hand, I’ve seen him linking to your blog, so hey, free traffic. Hopefully at least one of them will learn something.

Nick Sanders

And now he thinks I’m stalking him.

Bugsy

We saw it. It’s disgusting, and left us speechless.

On a different note, I’m glad that the little guy has made it into the clear!

Alain Couvier

The central premise to the skeptic narrative in regards to the paper authored amongst others by eminent Professor John Walker-Smith -Professor of Gastroenterology and former Editor in Chief of the Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology & Nutrition and who’s clinical experience was second to none in Europe and was subsequently awarded a Distinguished Service Award, was that the children in the Lancet paper and that presented themselves at the Royal Free Teaching Hospital did not have bowel disorders and certainly not Inflammatory Bowel Diseases or evidence of a non specific colitis.

All this oft times inexpert opinion has subsequently been overturned by advances in our knowledge of pediatric bowel pathology, the use of new innovative medical data applications and direct examination of children themselves.

When parents bought their children to the Royal Free Hospital they indicated that they as carers were concerned with the chronic and severe gastrointestinal disorders their children were suffering.The children in the majority were ASD and had shown regression loss of language or other skills.

Some expressed concern over a possible role of the MMR vaccine. Whilst the MMR controversy has overshadowed the main findings of the paper – Professor John Walker-Smith was clear in indicating that the team had found a unique colitis (inflammation) of the GI tract associated with Autism children.

Walker-Smith and colleagues found substantial evidence of inflammation in a further 47 / 50 children.

Clinical care and treatment regimes resulted in – “important behavioral responses in several of the children when their intestinal pathology is treated.” This work became foundational in pioneering the gut x brain axis in ASD. It has also paved the way for treatment regimes that ‘cure’ or at least significantly ameliorate aberrant behaviors, restores social interactions and improves vastly quality of life.

It has taken almost 14 years to confirm.

The relationship between GI and regression was confirmed in two studies (1,2) the first by Columbia University rsearchers in 2008 that found

“Cases had a high rate of CPEA-defined behavioral regression (loss of
language and/or other skills following acquisition), 88%”

and a second also featuring a team of researchers from Columbia University

In 2012 researchers from Harvard Medical School (3) led by Isaac Kohane examine some 14,000 ASD children and adults aged under 35. They found significant new information about ASD patients and their co-occurring / co-morbid conditions.

ASD patients (v hospital population) had nearly

10x the rate of Epilepsy

2x Inflammatory Bowel Disease

3x Bowel Diseases

As children grew into adulthood the rate of Inflammatory Bowel Disease changed from 2 to 3x suggesting a gene x environment interaction throughout development.

In January 2014 researchers from Harvard (4) including Isaac Kohnae and
Finale Doshi-Velez looked again at Autism and co-occurring diseases.
This time they identified specific sub-groups of ASD patients by medical
characteristics, They found 4 sub groups –

Group 1 was characterized by Seizure Disorder – seizures in this group was found in 77% (prevalence) of the patients. Gastrointestinal Disorders 14.17%

Group 4 was the largest but could not be further resolved. Seizures 18.6% and GI 3.43%

The researchers also noted – “a significant correlation existed between gastrointestinal disorders and seizures.” Suffice to say seizures and regression are a well known medical phenomena.

Independent confirmation (May 1, 2014) chronic and serious bowel disorders was made by researchers from Department of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia; and Marcus Autism Center, Atlanta,Georgia.(5)

They found children with ASD “experience significantly more general GI symptoms.” Some 4.42 (OR) higher. They also found diarrhea was 3.63 (OR), Constipation 3.86 (OR) and abdominal pain 2.45 (OR).

This accumulative evidence was a breakthrough from earlier stances that said there was a lack of evidence for an increased rates of chronic or
severe GI dsorders, as well as inflammatory bowel disease in autism.

Further in In April 2014 researchers from Johns Hopkins University (6) undertook a comprehensive study of “164 children with ASD evaluated at a pediatric neurology practice.”

* They found GI dysfunction in 49% of the children.

* They also reported that in children who had undergone endoscopic and
colonoscopic evaluations 6 out of 12 (50%) had inflammation present.

That was a stunning result with 50% of children having inflammation only identified after thorough clinical management and investigation. It
reflected the work of Professor John Walker-Smith.

The message for all of us in the ASD community, of which I am a proud father, is that parental reports of significant diseases and their observations are in nearly every case truthfully delivered for the care of their children.
Clinicians have now confirmed all of those observations.

If you Google Alain’s name you see that he spends lots of time arguing with people on various websites. You can’t reason him out of a conviction that he didn’t reason himself into and you are just providing him with entertainment. Consider not responding to him so that he stops clogging the comment feed with worthless drivel.

Nick Sanders

It’s your site, so I’ll stop if you want. But I’d like to say that he has provided me with at least as much entertainment as I might have provided him.

Alain Couvier

Wasn’t that interesting … the timing I mean just as another skeptic narrative went …

Personally, I am going to do an experiment to see if AC can function anaerobically.
Cheers AC, I hope you and insight cross paths sometime.

Who?

Sounds like a plan.

He does such a great job discrediting his own position, getting involved does seem a bit redundant.

Alain Couvier

“You can’t reason him out of a conviction that he didn’t reason himself into and you are just providing him with entertainment.”

First of all you’d have to provide reason Dr Tuteur

Montserrat Blanco

He only appears on Google. I do not know if he uses a pen name, but Couvier is not appearing on pubmed as a surname. You would think that he might be an expert on Pathology, clinical trials design, or something relevant, but he does not look like he is.

Who?

Oh I think one need only pay attention to what he writes, and how he responds to others, to see that expertise in any relevant field (including communications) is not in his toolbox. His main area of expertise seems to be in parrotting retracted articles and supporting discredited researchers. Nice work if you can stomach it.

My guess is, whatever his/her name is, s/he is involved in some online ‘university’ or other fee-mongering organisation, and s/he drums up business and enthusiasm via the gullible on the internet.

Amazed

Dr Amy, I see the number of comments here is going dangerously high. Do you think there’s any danger of the site collapsing as it did with the other vaccine post, the one with over 1000 comments?

As amusing as it’s been to watch Alain singing, La-la-la, I can’t hear you, I don’t think it’s worth it.

Wren

So basically retracted papers and slides from a talk which doesn’t even seem to address the issue in question are valid sources but actual studies that remain unretracted and any source AC deems “skeptical” or “biased” in any way are not.

Words are to be used however AC decides and common usage of terms is irrelevant.

“Pop” is somehow a meaningful contribution to a discussion.

There is no reason to learn the basics of scientific study design before making claims about what can and cannot be done, both ethically and in terms of statistical significance.

No, it doesn’t.
No one has ever denied that some people on the autism spectrum have GI issues, including IBD. Wakefield et al did not claim IBD, but some new non-specific colitis. Even if every person on the spectrum had IBD, which is certainly not the case given your own citations, there is no link shown between IBD and MMR or other vaccination.

Young CC Prof

I’m sure of it now. Alain Couvier is a pro-vaccine joker, here to demonstrate the profound intellectual bankruptcy of the antivaxxer position. He writes too smoothly to be as ignorant as he apparently is.

Alain Couvier

Is this really the brightest minds of the skeptic blogosphere ?

I must admit its reputation seems vastly over-rated. Would anyone like to disagree ?

KarenJJ

We have a reputation for being smart? Who said that? I want to be their friend.

Nick Sanders

Your failure to understand does not reflect upon our intelligence.

Alain Couvier

Unfortunately there is not a cohesive or intelligent argument to understand. Some very basic errors have led to this situation.

Nick Sanders

Are you talking about your own posts, or…?

Alain Couvier

No.

Nick Sanders

That’s strange, because you’re the one being incoherent and pointless.

Who?

Yes, we can all see that and yet you continue flogging your dead horse. Your errors, AC. All yours.

New readers should scroll down and read Playing Possum’s posts for an outline of why AC is fundamentally wrong in supporting Wakefield’s fraudulent position, while strongly defending Wakefield without having the guts to mention his name.

But do keep going you are doing the job of those who support vaccination way better than any of us ever could by demonstrating the arrogance, ignorance and delusion of your fellow travellers.

Who?

I love how you have been humiliated twice, once by someone mocking you and once by someone showing your entire ignorance of the fundamentals of your belief, but you’re back again for another crack.

Or is that why you re-start at the top, in the hope that new people mightn’t realise how you’ve been beaten before.

Alain Couvier

The skeptic mind is fascinating… see below.

Nick Sanders

Speaking of fascinating minds, you’re the one talking to yourself.

Who?

Yes I noticed the time gap after I’d posted-poor old AC must be having a lonely life.

Poggles – Are these (community) really the brightest minds of the skeptic blogosphere ?

Nope

Poogles

Oh, why bless your heart!

Who?

I called it-Rule 2 is on the table.

‘Community’ was implied, everyone. And he’s just made a post-ette above to further justify himself.

AC, you are better than the telly for entertainment.

yugaya

I have SAT prep class later on today. One of the things that I will be telling to these bright, talented kids who will be taking this test head on as non-natives is “if it ain’t written in black and white and spelled out, don’t assume it’s implied”.

Who?

You know what they say:

Assuming makes an ass out of ‘u’ and me.

Who?

You’re new to this, Poogles, I’ll tell you the rules:

Rule 1:AC is never wrong.
Rule 2:AC’s words are exactly what he says they are, in the order in which he says they appear, regardless of any and all evidence ie his previous words, to the contrary
Rule 3:AC’s words mean what he says they mean. He will not rely on anything so fanciful as a dictionary to come up with an agreed meaning.
Rule 4: Word meanings, like word order and existence in particular posts, are entirely at AC’s discretion to change whenever changing the suits his argument.

If you doubt any of this, look at the response he’s just posted to this comment of yours.

Humpty Dumpty, like I said. Once this is grasped, his entire world view falls into place.

Poogles

Yes, I see that now. I thought maybe he was just a little slow or confused, but no, he’s a very special kind of dense. Also, apparently, a huge narcissistic.

Alain Couvier

Nice rose avatar.

Poogles

Thanks! They’re my favorite 🙂

Who?

Oh and he cited Mazlow’s hierachy of needs and put himself on top, so nothing there to make you feel differently.

Alain Couvier

One should also be reminded of the second sentence …

“I must admit its reputation seems vastly over-rated. Would anyone like to disagree ?”

Who is its ? the (community), unstated but clearly implied.

Thanks.

Poogles

Sweetie, just because you changed from a plural to a singular from one sentence to the next does not make your bad grammar any better, only worse.

Ouch.

Who?

Rule 1, Poogles, think what you’re doing to Rule 1!

Who?

If you’re not extremely careful he’ll stop responding to you. He’s stopped responding to me, and as I said earlier, it’s doing me so much good!

Poogles

Eh, I’m having fun while it lasts 😀 Though, I probably should go to sleep soon.

Who?

It’s bucketing rain here. I just did the family’s tax papers so I need a little light entertainment.

It’s fun chatting to the other posters. People like AC are far more entertaining with a group around, since everyone has something different to bring to the exchanges.

Nick Sanders

Here it’s now doing freezing rain on top of the snow we’ve been having all day, so I’m definitely not going anywhere tomorrow.

Who?

It’s going to be really hot here tomorrow, and stinking humid, so a bit of snow sounds most appealing.

Nick Sanders

It’s quite pretty, although the sheet of ice over the roads is a different matter.

Who?

Well we have had sheets of water on ours which likely has a similar effect. It will be very pretty here in a week or two, everthing will be extra green.

Mind you the mozzies will then be out in full force.

Alain Couvier

Did you stub something ?

“I must admit it reputation seems vastly over-rated. Would anyone like to disagree ?”

Who?

You, AC, like the Australian Prime Minister, have, by your behaviour, moved beyond satire.

You and he have a lot in common: you both know everything and have a pathological fear of being shown to be wrong, so contort to avoid it; you both ignore what you don’t like instead of engaging with it; and you both torture the language.

Let’s hope you don’t share his taste in budgie smugglers, some things are just beyond being amusing.

Poogles

Oh, and thanks right back at ya!

Alain Couvier

Always happy to promote learning.

Poogles

Lol, is that what you call it? How cute!

Who?

So
Rule 5: Things are literal when AC says they are literal, and ironic when he says they are.

birthbuddy

Except you don’t.

Who?

He can’t. To put his position out would invite challenge, which he can’t tolerate. The closest he can come is poking at the people he disagrees with.

Asking AC to defend his position is like asking him to destroy himself. He simply can’t while holding his fragile personality together.

If he wasn’t so keen to promote the anti-vax tropes, the far kinder thing would be to leave him alone with his certainties and insecurities.

Well, since you’re the only one claiming we’re the brightest minds, I don’t see why we should.

Who?

Rule 1, Nick, think what you’re doing to Rule 1!!!

TinyTim

The CDC needs to a study comparing autism rates of vaccinated vs unvaccinated control groups. It will end the debate. If you fail to see the need for this study you either don’t care about the over 1,000,000 unvaccinated children, or you could care less about the over 1,000,000 afflicted with autism. You decide, sign this White House petition then share it.

Red herring. Why are you being avoidant about directly addressing the points that Young CC Prof just made? Are you able to directly address those points? Or are you trying to dodge, while hoping that we won’t notice that you’re dodging?

Alain Couvier

The question had previously been answered …

Can a vaccine v non vaccine study be conducted

a) ethically – Yes

b) feasibly – Yes

Nor does it have to be retrospective just longitudinal…

Nick Sanders

Again, that’s not what TinyTim was asking for.

Alain Couvier

The CDC needs to a study comparing autism rates of vaccinated vs unvaccinated control groups.

Seems plain enough to me.Glad I could help Mr Tim

Alain Couvier

…and of course burst one more skeptic bubble myth.

Nick Sanders

Now, do you understand what a control study is? Because it’s not a cohort study.

Alain Couvier

I do and researchers can design a study using longitudinal data to do just that … simple.

Thanks Bubble burst.

Nick Sanders

Except, no, they can’t, because a longitudinal study is not a control study. And TinyTim is asking for a control study.

Alain Couvier

It can be both.

Nick Sanders

No, it absolutely can’t, they are fundamentally different approaches to study design.

Alain Couvier

In a longitudinal study subjects are followed over time with
continuous or repeated monitoring of risk factors or health outcomes, or
both. Such investigations vary enormously in their size and complexity.
At one extreme a large population may be studied over decades. For
example, the longitudinal study of the Office of Population Censuses and
Surveys prospectively follows a 1% sample of the British population
that was initially identified at the 1971 census. Outcomes such as
mortality and incidence of cancer have been related to employment
status, housing, and other variables measured at successive censuses. At
the other extreme, some longitudinal studies follow up relatively small
groups for a few days or weeks. Thus, firemen acutely exposed to
noxious fumes might be monitored to identify any immediate effects.

Most longitudinal studies examine associations between exposure to
known or suspected causes of disease and subsequent morbidity or
mortality. In the simplest design a sample or cohort of subjects exposed
to a risk factor is identified along with a sample of unexposed
controls. The two groups are then followed up prospectively, and the
incidence of disease in each is measured. By comparing the incidence
rates, attributable and relative risks can be estimated. Allowance can
be made for suspected confounding factors either by matching the
controls to the exposed subjects so that they have a similar pattern of
exposure to the confounder, or by measuring exposure to the confounder
in each group and adjusting for any difference in the statistical
analysis.

You do grasp that there are likely to be differences between unvaccinated children and those whose parents do vaccinate, don’t you? For one thing, many parents of autistic children born just before or during the height of the “MMR causes autism” scare would probably choose not to vaccinate future children.

Alain Couvier

So have you applied this argument to previous studies that have found no connection ?

Wren

Yes, I have. Autism exists in both the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, appears to have a familial link and though rarely diagnosed before the age at which MMR vaccines are given, can often be seen in earlier videos of the children.

Alain Couvier

Yes, I have.

…and how did researchers address your argument in these studies – (“For one thing, many parents of autistic children born just before or
during the height of the “MMR causes autism” scare would probably choose
not to vaccinate future children.” )?

Young CC Prof

You don’t know what the scientific term “control” means, and you refuse to look it up.

You don’t have the faintest idea of the difference between a randomized controlled trial, an observational study and a case-control study, and you refuse to read about it.

You don’t know the difference between a retrospective study and a prospective study, nor do you know which is considered more reliable. You just use the words because they sound good.

A few days ago, Poogles put together a brilliant explanation of normal versus abnormal pathology, which you rejected without reading.

It’s like you walked into a room full of people discussing advanced music theory and criticism and started complaining about how it’s hard to play “Row your boat.” You don’t have to be as stunningly ignorant as you are. Start by looking up some of the terms I just used, Wikipedia is a decent starting point.

Alain Couvier

In a longitudinal study subjects are followed over time with
continuous or repeated monitoring of risk factors or health outcomes, or
both. Such investigations vary enormously in their size and complexity.
At one extreme a large population may be studied over decades. For
example, the longitudinal study of the Office of Population Censuses and
Surveys prospectively follows a 1% sample of the British population
that was initially identified at the 1971 census. Outcomes such as
mortality and incidence of cancer have been related to employment
status, housing, and other variables measured at successive censuses. At
the other extreme, some longitudinal studies follow up relatively small
groups for a few days or weeks. Thus, firemen acutely exposed to
noxious fumes might be monitored to identify any immediate effects.

Most longitudinal studies examine associations between exposure to
known or suspected causes of disease and subsequent morbidity or
mortality. In the simplest design a sample or cohort of subjects exposed
to a risk factor is identified along with a sample of unexposed
controls. The two groups are then followed up prospectively, and the
incidence of disease in each is measured. By comparing the incidence
rates, attributable and relative risks can be estimated. Allowance can
be made for suspected confounding factors either by matching the
controls to the exposed subjects so that they have a similar pattern of
exposure to the confounder, or by measuring exposure to the confounder
in each group and adjusting for any difference in the statistical
analysis…blah blah blah

Pop

Young CC Prof

Wonderful job copy-pasting from BMJ! Now, explain what that means and how it applies to at least one of the studies Nick Sanders provided.

Alain Couvier

Thanks better than wikipedia.

As to explanation I’m already ahead of you and have highlighted in bold exactly how you would go about this. Thanks.

Alain Couvier

That’s not the point though is it ?

Nick Sanders

Then what the hell is the point?

Alain Couvier

Can a vaccine v non vaccine study be conducted

a) ethically – Yes

b) feasibly – Yes

Nor does it have to retrospective just longitudinal…

Over to you Nick and Mike.

Nick Sanders

That wasn’t the question. The question was “Can the vaccine versus non-vaccine study *that anti-vaccine proponents are asking for* be conducted?”.

Alain Couvier

Let me check your post above …

“Such a study cannot ethically, or even feasibly, be done.”

As to the question “”Can the vaccine versus non-vaccine study *that anti-vaccine proponents are asking for* be conducted?”

The answer is – Yes

There are no detriments to conducting such a study. If you actually have any then put them in print here instead of useless links to skeptic websites and better yet provide a scientific or ethical rationale ?

Young CC Prof

You have asked for a study that randomly assigns children to receive all childhood vaccine or none. (If you would be satisfied with some lesser study, say so, and then we can talk.)

Feasibly, this is impossible because you’d never get enough participants. Most parents would not allow their children to participate because they wouldn’t risk their children contracting a serious disease, a few would not permit their children to get a vaccine. Almost no parent will give up the choice to a coin flip.

Ethically it can’t be done because the evidence in favor of vaccines is already overwhelming. We know exactly what this study would show: That the unvaccinated group catches far more VPDs, and otherwise there are no significant health differences.

If somebody came into the hospital with appendicitis, and the surgeon said, “I think that, rather than operate, we’ll just observe the normal course of the disease,” no one would tolerate that. Vaccines are even more proven than appendectomy, and much lower in risk to the patient.

Alain Couvier

1. You have asked for a study that randomly assigns children to receive all
childhood vaccine or none. (If you would be satisfied with some lesser
study, say so, and then we can talk.)

A longitudinal study does not assign. The study follows natural choice of the participants …

2. Feasibly, this is impossible because you’d never get enough participants.

The birth cohort each year has sufficient participants.

3. Most parents would not allow their children to participate because they
wouldn’t risk their children contracting a serious disease, a few would
not permit their children to get a vaccine.

The longitudinal study follows natural choice.

4. Ethically it can’t be done because the evidence in favor of vaccines is already overwhelming.

That assumes that all outcomes are equally distributed for each and every individual or specific populations of individuals. The study could possibly show positive effect for vaccines beyond targeted diseases.

I have promoted this permission frequently

We know exactly what this study would show: That the unvaccinated group
catches far more VPDs, and otherwise there are no significant health
differences.

That to is an assumption. There is also evidence that many natural infections themselves reduce the risk of subsequent diseases including cancer and atopic diseases such as asthma.

If somebody came into the hospital with appendicitis, and the surgeon
said, “I think that, rather than operate, we’ll just observe the normal
course of the disease,” no one would tolerate that.

Appendicitis is a disease condition that is not beneficial to the person. Whether vaccination or non vaccination , a differing schedule … is beneficial and how we translate that to differing populations is a more complex question.

Obviously longitudinal studies and large data sets of complex health and environmental factors will bring us great benefit.

For instance they have clearly evidenced inflammatory bowel diseases in Autism, something previously assumed by skeptics to be ..well ‘fictious”.

Young CC Prof

OK! So you don’t demand a randomized trial! So, Nick Sanders provided a whole lot of studies upthread. These are the ones that are similar to what you asked for:

So, the studies have been done. Feel free to critique one or more of them in detail.

Who?

I think part of the issue in attempting to communicate with AC is his Humpty Dumpty syndrome-words mean what they say he means. Also he adds or drops words to suit his convenience.

Playing Possum elegantly displayed that AC does not know of what he speaks, at least in so far as Wakefield’s activities, which seem to be the basis of his beliefs.

If he chooses to respond to you we will learn whether that ignorance is limited, or spreads into this area as well.

My prediction here is that AC will say the studies are all wrong for the purposes he proposes, due to (in his eyes) your fundamental misunderstanding of both the studies and his position.

Nick Sanders

The person asking for the randomized trial was “TinyTim”. Alain simply wandered in and declared me wrong, apparently without even taking the time to understand the context of the discussion.

Montserrat Blanco

No ethical board would ever approve something like that. In order to get a new drug approved you need to perform a study like that. In order to find out the side effects of a drug for something as uncommon as autism you need to do an observation study. The reason is that measles is a deadly disease and autism is not. It is unethical to expose people to a higher danger in order to find a difference in something else. If you try to demostrate that blood transfusions increase your risk of asthma you can not stop transfusing people that is bleeding to death. Look at the FDA rules for approving new drugs, the good clinical practice guidelines and pretty much anything you want about ethics in clinical trials. There is an edx course by Harvard University regarding the design of clinical trials that you might find useful.

Alain Couvier

There are some substantial misunderstandings presented

– Ethical boards have already approved such studies and will do so in the future.

– This is not a study to approve a new drug

– The relevancy of measles infection does not impact on the study.

– Severe Adverse Events and Autism can be “deadly “.

– Study design would preclude exposing people to danger.

– The study design does not exclude vaccination

– I’d question whether the FDA and Good Clinical Practice would be relevant.

Your going to have to define “skeptic” first. So far, you’ve been throwing it around without regard to it’s normally understood meaning. Under the standard definition of skeptic, there isn’t a difference, in position or even in personhood, between “skeptics” and the medical community at large.

Who?

Words mean what AC says they does, and that can change from post to post. He is Humpty Dumpty, and I fear may already be in pieces, as evidenced by his many delusions.

He can’t tell you what ‘skeptic’ means objectively, as that would involve ceding authority to a dictionary; I doubt he even knows what it means to him except that he experiences it as a vaguely pejorative handle for those who disagree with him.

Wren

Actually, I think you may have hit upon his definition there, as well as the reason no links are sufficient to show that Wakefield’s study is fraudulent and/or not to be relied upon. A skeptic is anyone who disagrees with AC upon the topic of vaccination and/or Wakefield.

Who?

Thing is, he won’t even mention Wakefield, just keeps pressing on with
the names of the retracting authors-though careful to expunge all notice
of that embarassing fact. The Lancet is obviously very precious to AC, and he mentions that a lot, again without mentioning the retraction.

Show him something objective-like YCCP’s link to the article-which if AC bothered to read it gave Wakefield some air time in which to defend himself-and he won’t even acknowledge it.
Life in his head can’t be easy.

Link to what? How can I argue against something when you won’t even make your claim clear?

Alain Couvier

I’ve made my claim abundantly clear – a vacc v unvacc study can be constructed that is ethical and feasible.

A reminder – you are saying the opposite . Defend your argument with something that does not link to a clearly provaccine blog or if not quote directly and we’ll discuss the nuances of that argument.

Nick Sanders

I never said a comparative study couldn’t be made. I said a double blind placebo study couldn’t be made.

Alain Couvier

…or you can quote from your ‘skeptic’ source and you can defend the skeptic position.

Nick Sanders

How the hell am I supposed to defend the “skeptic position” when I have no fucking clue what the hell you think skeptics are or what their position is?

Who?

He doesn’t know what he means himself. Watching him try would be like seeing a sheep walk on its hind legs-unnatural and a little bit cruel. It’s really kinder to let him stay in the echo chamber he’s built.

Alain Couvier

Come now I think everyone is well aware the general gist …vaccines are safe, Wakefield is a fraud , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases don’t exist … blah blah blah.

Who?

Oh great we can all go home. You’ve finally got it!

Nick Sanders

Well, two out of three of those are, as I said, the opinion of the general medical community.

Playing Possum

Inflammatory bowel disease exists. The Crohn’s disease – ulcerative colitis spectrum exists. Plus there are colitides which are caused by inflammation but aren’t called inflammatory bowel disease. But inflammatory bowel disease or colitis wasn’t what was described in the Lancet paper, despite the misleading name it was given.

You still don’t get it do you? What was reported in the Lancet paper wasn’t colitis, it wasn’t inflammatory bowel disease, and (with the exception of the three focal active colitis cases and the lymphocytic infiltration) was normal.

Wren

Do you really think he will take this in and change his mind?
Thank you from those of us who are capable of that and aren’t actually well-versed in the topic though.

Alain Couvier

Mr Possum you can verbiage all you like … you didn’t get past ‘non specific colitis’ ..

Playing Possum

Huh? Nonspecific colitis is not a thing – at least as described in the lancet paper. It is sometimes used as a clinical (not pathological) term that approximates irritable bowel syndrome. It has been used in the past to describe the current term “indeterminate colitis” which is true inflammatory bowel disease that doesn’t manifest itself clearly as either UC or Crohn’s. But that wasn’t what was found in the Lancet paper, by their own description of inflammation confined to the lamina propria (a normal variant), except for the four cases with intraepithelial inflammation.

I truly do not understand the point you are trying to make. Please be clear about what you want to argue.

Alain Couvier

I don’t need to argue anything . My point has been made – non specific colitis was (1924) and is a term still in practical use today (2015) even if the nomenclature has changed as you now admit.

Therefore the rest of your argument falls … for your argument to be sustained you need to show – (for it is your argument not mine)

1. That you have examined all necessary material (pathology , biopsy specimens , medical records , patient observations and professional knowledge) that the three gastroenterologists Professor John Walker-Smith, Professor Simon Murch and Dr Mike Thomson used to arrive at their conclusions. That if any conclusion has been made you have done so independently and without bias.

2. You would also have to provide accurate and clear data that identifies each and every child with ASD and the controls.

3. You would have to provide alternative and clearly evidenced clinical diagnosis of another disease condition found that fulfills the evidence presented.

4. Finally you would have to show that Inflammatory Bowel Diseases / non specific condition is not a condition that has been found in other populations.

Playing Possum

If your standards of discourse are so high that you can’t even have a conversation about established science with people practicing that science then I’m not sure what you are doing here. This is not the Rest Home for Discredited Researchers. This is a (peripheral to your sphere of interest) skeptic site which happens to be frequented by people who have actual qualifications in the fields they comment upon. I do not need to have seen the slides to know that they have been misdiagnosed, because their description is in the actual Lancet paper.

I suggest you open up dialogue with the organisations who criticized and forced the retraction of the Lancet paper, or perhaps with the international groups that make decisions on pathological nomenclature. The AFIP fascicles and WHO guides on tumors are somewhere to start if you have issues with the way histological patterns and findings are reported. Or you could contact the relevant colleges – they can probably refer you to the working parties that meet to discuss classifications and grades.

Alain Couvier

If you were interested in conversation then you would have freely admitted that opinions you expressed in regards to non specific colitis for one were errant.

Would I be interested in your second paragraph, unfortunately it to is not free from error.

1. organisations who criticized and forced the retraction of the Lancet paper,

I do not know of any organizations that forced the retraction of the Lancet paper on grounds related to the clinical research work on gastroenterology.

I do know that Professor John Walker-Smith was very much supported by the peak European organization that deals with Pediatric Gastroenterology, Histopathology and Nutrition. As this editorial confirms –

“The editors of JPGN is pleased to announce that a high court judge has nullified any finding of professional misconduct against Professor John Walker-Smith in relation to the Wakefield debacle. Prof Walker-Smith has made significant contributions to the understanding and treatment of paediatric gastrointestinal diseases, such as coeliac disease and inflammatory bowel disease. He has helped characterise cow’s milk–sensitive enteropathy, worked tirelessly within the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition to help establish practical diagnostic criteria for coeliac disease, and
served as an editor-in-chief of JPGN. He has taught and trained young paediatric gastroenterologists from countries around the world, many of whom are now leaders in our field. In June 2010, the European
Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition awarded Prof Walker-Smith the well deserved and first Distinguished Service Award.”

2. The AFIP fascicles and WHO guides on tumors are somewhere to start if
you have issues with the way histological patterns and findings are
reported.

Whilst I am the first to recognize that nomenclature, nosology and diagnosis changes over time referencing new material that Professor John Walker-Smith was unable to access would as an exercise be pointless.

3. If it is a contention that he and the other gastroenterologists committed any type of clincial fraud then you should avail yourself, with permission of course for the medical records of those children and other materiel as outlined previously above.

Or alternatively frame your opinion as a difference of opinion and provide supporting evidence.

4. You should also avail yourself of the research conducted below and referenced for easier access –

———————————————-

The Co-Morbidity Burden of Children and Young Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorders
Kohane 2012 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033224

Well, so, if Ethical Boards have approved such studies, what is the problem? you will have the results pretty soon.

No, it is a study to find out side effects of an approved drug, side effects that were not reported during the studies that led to the approval of the vaccines. That means that the side effect is at best, really infrequent, and those studies are conducted on regular basis on a different type of study, not a prospective double blind study, which is what you are asking for.

Severe adverse events can be deadly, yes, there is less than 1 in a million deaths attributed to the MMR vaccine. The problem is that with measles alone the death rate is 1 in 1000 in developed countries, so it is unethical to do not vaccinate children agaisnt measles in order to find out a small increase in autism that is not a deadly disease. I have not found a single citation where autism per se, without epilepsia increases death rate. If you have one, please share.

The study that you are proposing excludes vaccination on half of the population entering the study. Asuming you would have enough participants to demostrate a decrease in autism, you are exposing a lot of children to a disease with a 10% admission rate in developed countries and 1 per 1000 deaths, not to speak about permanent disabilities.

Well, yes, you can question good clinical practice, FDA, ethical boards, the Department of Health, the Office for Human Research Protections… But probably the rest of the world would prefer to participate in regulated research, not on a trial that you got from your hat and regulated by yourself.

In clinical trials.gov does not appear a single study on vaccines with the characteristics that you ask for conducted at Mass Gen, the hospital of Harvard University. I pointed a good free resource available online where you could learn something about designing clinical research and you somehow take that as Mass Gen conducting said research, well, does not say a lot about your reading comprehension, but in any case, if you know of a trial with said characteristics, please point it out, as I could not find it.

Relevant references:

– Institue of Medicine. Responsible research: a systems approach to protecting research participants.

– National Commission for the portection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural research. The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection fo human subjects of biomedical and behavioral research.

– US General Accounting Office: Continued vigilance critical to protecting human subjects.

Montserrat Blanco

To clarify why this trial is not possible. Measles carries a 1 per 1000 of death, 10% of hospital admissions and 1% of meningitis. The MMR vaccine presents a less than 1 in a million deaths, less than 1 in 1000 hospitalizations and 1 in a million meningitis. This is literal from the Code of Federal Regulations. It applies to children:

§46.406 Research involving greater than minimal risk and no
prospect of direct benefit to individual subjects, but likely to yield generalizable knowledge about the subject’s disorder or condition.

HHS
will conduct or fund research in which the IRB finds that more than
minimal risk to children is presented by an intervention or procedure
that does not hold out the prospect of direct benefit for the individual
subject, or by a monitoring procedure which is not likely to contribute
to the well-being of the subject, only if the IRB finds that:

(a) THE RISK REPRESENTS A MINOR INCREASE OVER MINIMAL RISK;

(b)
The intervention or procedure presents experiences to subjects that are
reasonably commensurate with those inherent in their actual or expected
medical, dental, psychological, social, or educational situations;

(c) The intervention or procedure is likely to yield generalizable
knowledge about the subjects’ disorder or condition which is of vital
importance for the understanding or amelioration of the subjects’
disorder or condition; and

(d)
Adequate provisions are made for soliciting assent of the children and
permission of their parents or guardians, as set forth in §46.408.

Nick Sanders

So, you clearly either didn’t read the article I posted, don’t know what’s being asked for, or don’t understand at least one of them.

Alain Couvier

One single point perhaps that you could argue ?

Who?

Avoiding the issue, again.

If you’re the finest mind anti-vax has to hand, and at all representative of their rhetorical style, it’s pretty clear the future of vaccination is safe.

Since there are so many knowledgeable people here, I thought I go ahead to ask my question: My whole family is fully vaxxed, and Dr. Amy helped me out so much during my pregnancy by answering my questions by email and reassuring me to not fall for the woo, therefore I’m a huge fan and follower. OK, after reading a little bit about vacvine injuries, I got the impression that a large percentage is totally bogus (no cause and effect, presumed damage appears years later etc), but some reports of parents sound legit. E.g. some of the reports of receiving a MMR shot, directly reacting with high fevers and seizures, and having a modified development from that point on. I know that correlation is not causation, but IF these reports were true, a strong correlation should raise suspicion. Now I know that study after study discarded the autism MMR connection, I’m just wondering how these parent reports fit in. Any information available? Are they all interpretations ex post? Have studies/debunking efforts been carried out?

Stacy48918

As I understand (and please correct me if I’m wrong), yes, some children may have fevers subsequent to vaccinations that are high enough to induce a seizure. But (1) it’s the fever causing the seizure, not the vaccine itself. Control the fever, control the seizure; (2) while the idea of my child seizing is horrifying, there typically are no long term effects (i.e. no neuro damage).

Also bear in mind that infantile seizures in and of themselves are common in the first year of life. If a child is going to receive vaccines on roughly 5 different appointments in the first year of life, that’s a 5/365 chance that an infantile seizure will coincide with a date of vaccination. That’s not all that small.

Daleth

And it’s 10/365, or almost 1/36, if you count the day after the child gets the shot. I think most parents would blame the shot if their kid got a high fever out of nowhere 24 hours later.

Stacy48918

Paul Offit recounts a story in his book Deadly Choices of a father that took his child to a public vaccine clinic, waited in line for hours, and eventually left without getting the vaccines. That night the baby died of SIDS. One can imagine how easy it would have been for that grief stricken father to have blamed his child’s SIDS death on vaccines if he had stayed for the shot.

Many common conditions in the first year of life could coincide with vaccination, which just makes an easy plot for blaming the vaccine, rather than random chance.

Dorothea Pfeiffer

A lot of good answers, I think that I should read Offit’s book. Further, the probability that an adverse advent happens around a doctor’s appointment in the first year actually convinced me, it’s with 1:36 quite high. Btw, I never meant to claim that there is a conspiracy or an attempt to cover things up going. I just never thought a lot about vaccinations, and am not knowledgable. Have not “done my research”, lol. So thanks to all of you..

Wren

Honestly, even if a child only got one vaccine a year 1/365 is still pretty high.

Who?

My friend took her baby out for his jab, they ran the rule over him and he was fine, but when they went to do it found they were out of vax and sent him home. He had a seizure in the car on the way, his first one. Scary, but he was fine.

As you say, a lot of things happen all the time in babyhood. One thing coming after another, on its own, means nothing.

Medwife

My son had a febrile seizure with a temp of only 100F. I’m fairly sure that non-medical type parents would not have recognized it because it was focal, but it was definitely a seizure. (No vaccines around that time, btw.) infantile seizures are probably more common than they’re given credit for.

Sullivan ThePoop

I had a friend whose daughter tragically died from SIDS. She was supposed to have a well visit and shots that day, but the appointment was rescheduled for a later date.

Wren

I’ve read plenty of “vaccines harmed my baby” stories in which the fever occurred up to a week after the vaccine but was still blamed on the vaccine.

Of all the claimed vaccine damage stories, those involving a fever bother me the most. If the fever from the vaccine is so terrible, what about the fever if they got the disease?

KarenJJ

I looked about on the internet about adverse reactions when my immunologist started asking me about my vaccine reactions and I couldn’t help but wonder about whether some of the kids that showed severe fevers and reactions to vaccines were also affected with rare auto-inflammatory syndromes. These syndromes are incredibly rare (they’re also called periodic fever syndromes) and illness/injury can also cause a flare, but it only would take one or two cases with a flare post-vaccine to be repeated chinese-whisper style amongst the anti-vax movement.

But this information is openly available and prompted changes to the vaccine schedule and one of the flu vaccines is now not recommended to kids under 5 (from memory the researcher was unable to determine the mechanism behind the high fevers but it was believed to be an overall issue with one particular flu vaccine and not just a bad batch). The idea of an overall conspiracy of doctors hiding thousands of cases doesn’t seem plausible. There were a hundred children with severe fevers in a state of 2 million people and it was public and changes were made.

Alain Couvier

The parents in the original Lancet study reported gastrointestinal diseases and regression of previously learned skills and speech…

Professor John Walker-Smith and his team of gastroenterologists reported findings of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases that did not fit the usual clinical profile ie non specific colitis or autistic enterocolitis

Both the findings in regards to regression and Inflammatory Bowel Disease / non specific colitis have been independently verified by by both Harvard Universoty researchers and Johns Hopkins researchers.
As has a relationship between GI and seizures and two vaccines two vaccines with IBD the DTP vaccine and the Polio vaccine.

Nick Sanders

By “the original Lancet study” are you referring to Wakefield’s totally bogus piece of crap?

anonnon

It’s interesting how Alain Couvier just posts the same stuff about autism and gastro issues all over the net, like he’s been doing here.

Nick Sanders

I wouldn’t know, his account is private.

anonnon

All I did was search for his name, I was curious what kind of person he was. I found a lot of posts on autism scattered around, all saying the same stuff he’s saying here.

Nick Sanders

Wonderful.

Alain Couvier

So back to the medical science …anything you need explained ?

Nick Sanders

How you missed one of the most high profile controversies in recent history would be a good start.

Alain Couvier

I haven’t … but what is it that you don’t agree with about the medical science in the Lancet paper ?

You have read the paper in its entirety ?

Nick Sanders

Why is this about me? The entire medical community has refuted and renounced the paper. That’s enough for me, and it should be more than enough for you.

Alain Couvier

It has ? That would be something new to the medical community ?

Or does the skeptic community choose carefully the medical science it likes ?

Or is this, in fact, all a giant conspiracy to keep the brilliance of Wakefield and now AC hidden from the world? Because as we know the more people there are in a conspiracy, the easier it is to keep it secret, nod, wink.

You’ve had time to post all that and he still hasn’t posted what he offered me.

Alain Couvier

So have you read the full paper ?

Have you read the varying authors (accused) responses ?

Nick Sanders

Have you considered how much you sound like a broken records?

Alain Couvier

It’s up to you Nick and the skeptic community. There’s a lot of sock puppets in support….

Nick Sanders

Up to me how?

Alain Couvier

Show me the ‘fraud’ ?

Show me the medical science that disproves the Lancet paper ?

Nick Sanders

I just did like half an hour ago.

Alain Couvier

I see a whole lot of links ?

What specifically do you say is fraudulent about the medical science in the Lancet paper ?

Nick Sanders

You see the links? That’s good. Now read them.

Alain Couvier

Yes and I’ve asked you for specifics.

Which part of the Lancet study or the medical science within it do you and the skeptic community say is in error ?

Nick Sanders

All of it.

Who?

Do you think the medical board kicked Wakefield out for being an honest practitioner? Did The Lancet withdraw the article on a whim?

Surely if either of those are prestigious institutions when you want to talk about how good you think Wakefield’s work is, and that he was allied with them, the fact they’ve both disowned him should give you a hint he is no longer in good odour?

Or is the trouble that the whole world is wrong and Wakefield and you are right?

KarenJJ

Seriously? What websites do you regularly visit where sock puppets are such a common thing? Maybe the reason you are finding so many people against you here is because you are by far in the minority position – in the real world and even more so on this site.

Who?

It is instructive to remember that the overwhelming majority of people support vaccination. It’s easy to forget that when the professional stirrers like AC get into the mix.

AC, you are the one on the outer, in real life as well as on this site.

yugaya

The only sock puppets I’ve noticed around here appear when a specific type of snakeoil-peddling parachuter drops by and has their “science” dissected in detail ( that type is people with direct personal or financial interest in peddling nonsense). It’s their version of damage control I guess, inventing others that are in full agreement.

Dr Kitty

I have, actually, and I agree with the GMC, the Lancet and the opinion of the medical establishment that the entire thing was fraudulent based on flawed and unethical research, at its root caused by a serious financial conflict of interest in the main author (Wakefield). The paper was retracted for good reason and its findings should be dismissed as junk.

It is the BMJ piece from 2011which describes how the pathology samples used by Wakefield in his study were shown to other histopathologists, who classified them as normal, with no evidence of colitis.

This is what Playing Possum has already told you.
Wakefield re-classified normal specimens as abnormal, using his own set of criteria, in order to add weight to his claim of a vaccine mediated gut injury. Those claims are bogus, and have been shown to be bogus, repeatedly.

You are the one who doesn’t get the science Alain. You.

Alain Couvier

Even the most cursory knowledge of the Lancet paper identifies the gastroenterolgists and pathologists that undertook clinical care, investigation and reporting relating to the children with gastrointestinal disease.

I must assume you are familiar with scientific papers, therefore it is difficult to understand how you arrived at your … opinion ?

As for direct criticism of the article from a non medically trained journalist … who better than Professor Amar Dhillon.

“The BMJ’s articles on these grading sheets in the issue of 12 November show several misunderstandings.

Many are a result of a lack of understanding of the difference between,
on the one hand, the systematic documentation of specific microscopical
features in a grading sheet by a “blinded” pathologist and, on the
other, conclusion of an overall clinicopathological diagnosis by
integrating clinical information with diverse lines of investigation.
The difference between the two activities should be understood better.”

In common parlance … ouch.

Alain Couvier

When you and the Messr Possum are ready to apologize please feel free to do so and add my favorite chocolates and some flowers. I remain sentimental to the old world charms of manners and good behavior.

birthbuddy

Manners and good behaviour???
Do you genuinely believe that is how you come across?

Who?

I think he probably does believe he is a model of civility, as well as an island of knowledge and wisdom in a sea of ignorance. Like the soldier marching with the wrong foot forward, he thinks everyone else is out of step.

And he’s ignoring me which is doing me so much good, I can’t tell you.

Dr Kitty

Really?
His defence is that he found something wrong BECAUSE HE WAS LOOKING FOR SOMETHING WRONG, when other histopathologists, when blinded to the history, FOUND NOTHING WRONG.

That is a defence of his actions, it is not actually a defence of the trials methods, nor of his findings… which are still JUNK.

Tell me why the Lancet retracted the paper?
Why no other subsequent studies have been able to replicate Wakefield’s findings?

Come on Alain. We’re not the ones looking dumb here…

Saying “I believe the findings of a tiny, unethical, discredited study which has been retracted and denounced by its publisher and torn apart by multiple peer reviewers. I continue to believe in its findings, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, and without out any subsequent corroborating studies” isn’t making you look too smart.

Arguing with a pathologist about the histopathology of colitis REALLY doesn’t make you look smart.

Wakefield’s study should never have got out of peer review. It should never have been published and now it has been retracted it is insane to still treat it as having worth of any kind.

Alain Couvier

I suppose in a personal observation I have a bias to medical science, so when some of the most renowned gastroenterologists and pathologists in the United Kingdom , Professor John Walker-Smith, Professor Simon Murch, Professor Amar Dhillon and Dr’s Mike Thomson and Susan Davies tell me the children have an inflammatory bowel diseases I put a great more weight behind their professional opinion.

Do you npt believe in professional experience and judgement ? (rhetorical)

Thanks for your input but you haven’t really made any sort of argument , except a flurry of yelling and shouting.

““They had to create a new disease, and when Susan Davies got
normal results they were in trouble,” argues Tom MacDonald,
a gastrointestinal immunologist and dean of research at Barts
and the London school of medicine. He has published on
Wakefield’s findings with Domizio,33 and both have consulted
for vaccine manufacturers, inspecting some of the biopsy slides.“If there wasn’t IBD [inflammatory bowel disease], then
Wakefield’s whole theory collapsed, and with it the litigation
which was paying him.”

pop

Nick Sanders

Two problems:

Firstly, your link just goes to a page called “IACC Workshop on Under-Recognized Co-Occurring Conditions in ASD Slide Presentations”
Is there a specific presentation you wish me to look at, and would you kindly explain how vaccines are involved?

Secondly, how does pointing out Wakefield’s own conflicts of interest bolster your point?

Alain Couvier

1. Isaac Kohane

2. Dr Wakefield’s alleged COI is well known … other disclosures of importance less well known.

Nick Sanders

1. Ok, now I have a name, what am I supposed to do with it?
2. It’s not “alleged”.

Wren

Ooh! I know the answer to number one!

You look at the slides in the page he linked earlier, realise they have nothing to do with AC’s claims, then realise he didn’t even pay enough attention to notice it is the presentation below that one that has any relationship to autism plus GI issues, and even that has very little and no claims of non-specific colitis.

Oh, wait. I probably have that wrong. You are probably meant to trust his citation of just a name and believe Wakefield was all a witch hunt and he should now be head of medicine everywhere, with only his own special vaccines given.

Nick Sanders

Holy shit, a range of 9% to 91%? That is a wonky ass scattering of data.

I don’t think you are interpreting that quote correctly. Tom MacDonald is saying Wakefield needed to have IBD shown in the results, which it was not, in order to maintain his funding from the litigation.

Alain Couvier

pop

Wren

Is that intended as a meaningful response?

It is not meaningful.

Sorry. This was intended for the second “pop” comment, not the first one which just ended in “pop”. Why you feel “pop” is meaningful is beyond me.

Nick Sanders

Elsewhere on the page he claims he is “popping skeptic bubble myths”.

Wren

Some evidence might be helpful in that endeavour.

Alain Couvier

Yes it is visual thinking – the meaning of course is implied – in this case the popping of a balloon , the balloon represents a skeptic narrative.

birthbuddy

So, should we respond to you with “thud”, as in lead balloons?
Or, perhaps “bang”, as you shoot yourself in the foot?

Wren

Or, of course, it refers to yet another neuron of yours popping out of existence.
You should perhaps be more careful in your choice of words. Not everyone is in your head thinking the way you do.

Wren

How is that relevant to this paper, which has been retracted?

I don’t like seeing unethical studies done, particularly on children who had excessive and sometimes painful testing done for no reason.

Alain Couvier

How is that relevant to this paper, which has been retracted?

‘We investigated a consecutive series of children with chronic enterocolitis and regressive developmental disorder.”

Wren

The paper has been retracted. I cannot be used to provide evidence for your argument in any meaningful way.

Nick Sanders

Let’s see, John Walker-Smith was struck off by the GMC, and Susan Davies says they do not have such a disease.

Alain Couvier

You are in error in again

Professor John Walker-Smith had all charges from the GMC quashed by the UK High Court.

The GMC’s response: the issue was not clearly laying out reasoning, not that Walker Smith was in fact in the right. Note that this does not change the MMR-Autism debate as there is still not evidence for the link.

Now we can begin to focus the research on the care and treatment of children with ASD whatever causation.

That would be my reasonable position.

Wren

1. In the case of Walker Smith, yes, he won his appeal. In the case of Wakefield, not at all.

2. Proven? We are still awaiting your proof. The paper was retracted and remains retracted. Even if it were not, it was, at best, a small preliminary study and hardly conclusive had it not been fraudulent.

Alain Couvier

1. Credibility – if you get two major issues wrong then … one is want to question the accuracy of your other opinions. Unless of course they are verified by say … the UK High Court.

2. Harvard University researcher has already given his presentation to the NIH IAAC

1. The issue in the case of Walker Smoth concerned the reasoning given, not the final conclusion. Wakefield’s case included far more egregious breaches and even Wakefield has chosen to be struck off rather than attempt an appeal. Credibility is a much larger problem for the paper than for those who agree with the retraction.

2. “Harvard University researcher”? Intriguing name. has his study been published in a peer reviewed journal?

Nick Sanders

1. Then why should we believe you, who has gotten every major issue wrong so far, about anything?

“But Dhillon’s reports produced results that pathologists, gastroenterologists, and a gastrointestinal immunologist to whom we have shown them say are overwhelmingly normal and might be found in almost anybody’s gut.”

Alain Couvier

Your sources are unreliable at best.

“But Dhillon’s reports …”

There’s your error … all others are of course cumulative.

Nick Sanders

Please, do enlighten me how that is an error.

Alain Couvier

Professor Amar Dhillon simply says 20 of them are not his – different handwriting apparently.

Ouch.

Nick Sanders

And you can demonstrate that this is the case?

Alain Couvier

I take a esteemed Professor’s word … are you suggesting he is lying ?

Nick Sanders

I’m suggesting there’s good reason to think so.

Alain Couvier

sigh Then your on your own. But please feel free to write down your accusations against Professor Dhillon and I’ll be happy to forward them.

Who?

Implicated in one of the greatest research frauds of the 20th century, partly responsible for probably thousands of deaths and permanent injuries from vaccine preventable measles.

Why would he lie?

Alain Couvier

..and I believe Brian Deer concurs.

Who?

You also believe Wakefield is an honest researcher, which makes all your other beliefs highly suspect.

Nick Sanders

Show me where.

Alain Couvier

In your reference – you should read more closely

“The grading sheets were also used for small intestinal biopsies, which could not show colitis, and reports compiled by Andrew Anthony, a trainee pathologist assisting Dhillon…

Nick Sanders

At first, I was going to point out that you apparently didn’t see the word “also” in that passage, but it’s worse, you are taking it out of context to blatantly misrepresent what is said.

“But experts we consulted say this interpretation is wrong. The grading sheets were also used for small intestinal biopsies, which could not show colitis, and reports compiled by Andrew Anthony, a trainee pathologist assisting Dhillon, used a different form that included the term “non-specific changes,” although he did not tick that option for any of the biopsies.”

Alain Couvier

…and what did Professor Amar Dhillon say ?

That 20 of them were not his.

Nick Sanders

And I still have no reason to take his word for it.

Alain Couvier

You do now or don’t you believe your own sources ?

Nick Sanders

At what point have my sources contradicted me?

Alain Couvier

If you can’t get your source material correct all else falls … as does the ‘expert’ opinion.

Nick Sanders

So, we’re just going to pretend that your complete fabrication didn’t happen? Is that what we are doing now? Because you have yet to show any contradictions between my statements and my lsources.

Alain Couvier

It is up to you to check your sources.

To bolster your rather innocuous case – you could verify each child against each pathology report.

Nick Sanders

And it’s up to you to back your claims. I’m not going on a wild goose chase looking for some mythical contradiction that you claim is there on the basis of you don’t feel like being proven wrong.

Alain Couvier

These are your claims Mr Sanders … check your sources. Apologies that I burst another skeptic bubble … but hey that’s just me.

Nick Sanders

I have checked my source, there is no contradiction. If I am wrong, please, feel free to point out where.

Alain Couvier

Did you check your primary sources ? The documents themselves ?

When you do , because they are ‘your’ sources let me know how you went.

Otherwise case closed.

Who?

What is ‘ouch’? Is it the more aggressive form of ‘meh’?

Much like your hero Wakefield you have co-opted bits of language for your own use.

Alain Couvier

Autism and GI disease is one of the most important issues in our community. Now that it is firmly established that Gastrointestinal Diseases, including Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Epilepsy / Seizures and systemic inflammation are all found at substantially higher greater rates, then the Autism community and the general community need to know that information.

Is there any reason why the skeptic community would find that problematic ?

KarenJJ

As someone with a lifelong serious issue with systemic inflammation, I’d say the research is far more interesting and diverse than what you are trying to discuss here. Yes chronic inflammation can cause progressive brain damage (eg with NOMID), but that is not autism.

Who?

Higher greater rates than what and when?

Nick Sanders

And among whom?

Alain Couvier

Children.

Is there anything else you do not understand about the medical science ?

Who?

One out of three, good.

So now, higher greater rates where and when?

Nick Sanders

Well, there’s why you cloak yourself in undeserved smugness, but I can’t be certain that’s a medical issue.

Alain Couvier

Stick to the medical science … is that not enough challenge ?

Nick Sanders

I’d be happy if I could get you to stick to a thread once I show you medical science, but so far, that’s been a pipe dream.

Alain Couvier

Your link above does not work … but then it links to a skeptic site so I don’t think I’ll bother anyway.

Over to you then …

Nick Sanders

I love this, you accuse me of choosing the science I like, then you say that.

Alain Couvier

Your link doesn’t work … and the site you link to is clearly biased. You don’t understand that ?

Nick Sanders

The link has been fixed. That much was an error on my part. The rest is on you.

Alain Couvier

Why did you change to another site ?

Nick Sanders

I didn’t, I accidentally appended the link to the end of this site’s URL. (Long story) But that does raise a question, if you found the URL objectionable, and it started with this page’s URL (to this very article actually), why are you here?

Alain Couvier

To debate the issue ? Is that not simple enough ?

Nick Sanders

Given that you appear to wish to engage not in debate but in sophistry, I’d say it’s a valid question.

Alain Couvier

How is it sophistry ?

Here’s what I am debating

“Skeptics are fundamentally wrong about nearly every aspect if not all of the medical science of vaccines , particularly the Lancet paper.”

Nick Sanders

Debating involves offering supporting evidence for one’s position as well as considering the evidence of opponents. You have shown no willingness to do either.

Alain Couvier

Can you give me a specific ?

Nick Sanders

Specific what?

birthbuddy

How do vaccines work, AC?

Who?

Definition please-who are, by your definition-‘skeptics’?

Nick Sanders

For that matter, since the link didn’t work, how could you have assessed bias in the site?

Alain Couvier

The link contains the name all else is self evident.

Nick Sanders

What name?

Alain Couvier

The name of the site.

Nick Sanders

Which is?

Alain Couvier

Your link still not working ?

Nick Sanders

Sonnova… wow, I just cannot copy and paste that one right for some reason. Going back to fix it now.

birthbuddy

Maybe AC is Wakefield??

Who?

Certainly makes more sense than 2 independent people believing this nonsense.

If he is times must be tough on the autism circuit.

yugaya

i don’t think that Wakefield believes it, fraudsters don’t believe the lies that they tell and Alain probably does not either because he’d have to be really daft in that case and not a skepticism crusader. It just appears to him that it reinforces his opinions, so he brings it along when he attempts to assume the authority of medical science as a whole:

“Unfortunately medical science speaks louder …”
“Is there anything else you do not understand about the medical science ?”
“Stick to the medical science … is that not enough challenge ?”
“So back to the medical science …anything you need explained ?”

Alain’s claims = medical science, once you swallow that everything else will fit in nicely.

Who?

I don’t know about the state of their belief-the idea of living a lie and exploiting people like that horrifies me and I can’t imagine living that way. But we’re not all made the same-which is a good thing-so I have to concede that what you say is certainly possible.

I suppose if Alain wins you over with what passes for charm, then what he says must make sense. I experience him as creepy with a paternalistic style that I respond very badly to. No doubt others find him compelling.

Anyway he’s making a goose of himself here which is a good thing, since for one he’s unlikely to win anyone over, and he’s also making lots of people very aware of his positions.

yugaya

When I see such persistence in repeating the same logical mistakes and fallacies in argumentation it usually is not because someone is being deliberately deceptive.

His complete inability to accept feedback, lack of self-assessment skills and blaring absence of empathic listening in communication terms mean that there is much, much more wrong with how he communicates with others in general, as opposed to someone just trying to fraud their way through a debate.

Alain Couvier

Unfortunately medical science speaks louder …

Nick Sanders

It does, which is how we now it was a bogus piece of crap. So, I ask again, are you referring to Wakefield’s faked paper?

That’s the most pertinent, but hardly the only one. The paper was pulled, everyone but Wakefield took their name off of it before that, and it led directly to him losing his medical license.

Playing Possum

Ileal lymphoid nodular hyperplasia is a normal finding in ALL children. It would be notable for its absence. Non specific colitis is an incredibly common non-specific finding that can be due to a huge range of insults … including the laxative solution used to empty the bowel in order to do the colonoscopy.

All of the biopsies taken were originally reported as normal by an essentially blinded pathologist. They were then re-reported by pathologists recruited by Wakefield, who were using a non-standard and broad set of diagnostic standards which were concocted by Wakefield. These diagnostic standards basically reported normal variants (that are routinely ignored by pathologists because otherwise each biopsy would have a diagnosis list of many pages), thus increasing the pickup for “abnormal” findings.

ETA: And I don’t think it was even correctly attributed as “colitis”, at least not active colitis, which is the diagnosis that should be measured.

Alain Couvier

Ileal lymphoid nodular hyperplasia is a normal finding in ALL children.

Cite

It would be notable for its absence.

Cite

Non specific colitis is an incredibly common non-specific finding that can be due to a huge range of insults …

Cite

You know the routine.

Who?

Do you?

birthbuddy

Hi AC, back for more I see.
You still haven’t realised that you are dealing people far more knowledgeable than you.

Who?

I think you’ve scared him off.

Playing Possum

PMID: 21188221
PMID: 22428565
PMID: 22849731
cover the histology and development of GALT in the small bowel, the concept of “nodular lymphoid hyperplasia”, and the differential diagnosis of colitides in biopsies.

I will apologise for using the term “hyperplasia”, as it is obviously a red flag. The nodular lymphoid tissues in a child’s ileum are by definition hyperplastic compared to an adult.

The absence or hypoplasia of secondary lymphoid tissue in a child’s biopsy is a big big deal, it will prompt an investigation into the child’s immune system to exclude an immunodeficiency. Or the kid could be on chemo.

The Wakefield paper defined “non-specific colitis” as “infiltration by mononuclear cells”. It didn’t even need epithelial infiltration as a diagnostic requirement – however, colitis is defined histologically by epithelial infiltration. Mononuclear cells are a NORMAL population of the lamina propria of the colon – I won’t cite it because there are plenty of histology texts available online.

And now I need to bleach my eyes after looking at that pile of fraudulent poop that is Wakefield’s Lancet paper.

Who?

Sorry about your eyes.

Think of all those kids with autism who thanks to the kind of thinking AC is pushing are given bleach enemas, and all those parents who think they are doing the right thing but have been lied to by these guys to boost their own egos and profit.

Alain Couvier

I’m not sure your citations evidence your position

Ileal lymphoid nodular hyperplasia is a normal finding in ALL children.

I could not find a statement from your evidence that supports this.

It would be notable for its absence.

Nor this statement

Non specific colitis is an incredibly common non-specific finding that can be due to a huge range of insults …

Nor this

Whilst your references are interesting and support an argument it does not support yours –

a) that the children had ‘normal’ or even ‘common’ Gastrointestinal biopsies and pathology.

b) that the findings were in any way fraudulent

KarenJJ

Your point (b) would be dependant upon your understanding of the citations posted by Playing Possum above and how that relates to the original Lancet Wakefield paper. I’m not convinced of your understanding of the papers cited. Can you explain them to me simply (I’m a non-medical person)?

Who?

I think you may be on to something here. AC is fencing with Playing Possum who seems to have brought nukes rather than the usual epee to the contest.

Alain Couvier

Well so ends that issue.

Who?

You’ve convinced yourself! Again!

So now it is just you and Wakefield, against the world.

Did you ever post all that information you offered?

birthbuddy

For you maybe. The rest of us normal folk all seem to agree.

Playing Possum

Ok. The concept of ‘nonspecific colitis’ was made up. According to the lancet paper, it was defined as an infiltrate of mononuclear cells in the lamina propria. These are a normal component of the lamina propria. They didn’t require infiltration of the epithelium, which is the histological definition of colitis- even by neutrophils (which is a common finding in colonic biopsies – (‘focal active colitis’), or lymphocytes (‘lymphocytic’ or ‘microscopic colitis’). Both these entities are recognized and are found in any pathology textbook – they are also described in one of the papers. One of the other papers restates another thing that is found in any pathology textbook- that lymphoid nodules are numerous and large (hyperplastic) in the child.

The findings were fraudulent because they created a pathological entity from accepted normal variants. Most people see ‘nonspecific colitis’ and think, wow, sounds serious. But it isn’t _colitis_ and would be reported by pathologists as normal. That is the issue at least from the biopsy point of view. You can use the term to describe clinical symptoms such as in IBS, but it has no pathological correlate or significance.

It would have been a great breakthrough and of massive benefit if what Wakefield reported was true. It would have kickstarted research that might have led to real benefits for these families and for science. And instead of spending that research money and time on something useful, it was wasted on Wakefields distraction. Do you honestly believe there is solid, plausible science being kept from the public about this? There are too many people (millions) and too much innate goodwill in the major players (doctors and nurses and scientists) for such conspiracy.

Alain Couvier

The concept of ‘nonspecific colitis’ was made up.

Burrill Bernard Crohn, a name you may or may not be familiar with, was using the term back in the day (1924 ).

No problem. The concept of ‘non specific colitis’ as defined histologically by the Lancet study was made up. It described an established variation of normal.

You missed the ulcerative in ‘Non specific colitis’. If we were talking about the inflammatory bowel disease spectrum including UC then colitis histologically requires intraepithelial inflammation, architectural evidence of chronic colitis or granulomatpus change.

ETA – granulomatous change. Although granulomatpus is kind of apt…

Alain Couvier

Let’s go back …

The concept of ‘nonspecific colitis’ was made up.

pubmed/1089084

“Ulcerative colitis and granulomatous colitis are distinct entities, but up to 10 per cent of colectomy specimens remain unclassified.”

“Even by colectomy, 29 of 300 specimens were sufficiently atypical so as not to warrant a label of Crohn’s disease, or ulcerative colitis”

pubmed/670413

“It is stated that 10-20% of cases of non-specific inflammatory bowel disease cannot be classified. ”

pubmed/7597492

“We report two cases in which the presence of an anal fissure delayed the diagnosis of nonspecific colitis in premature infants”

Your argument falls on that first statement.

Playing Possum

The articles you cite are referring to true colitis – that is surface infiltration including cryptitis/ crypt abscesses. The Lancet paper described the majority of their specimens having inflammatory cells in the lamina propria (a normal finding) and NOT having surface infiltration – because they note the four that DO have surface infiltration – one lymphocytic and three neutrophilic (these three represent ‘focal active colitis’). The nonspecific colitis of Wakefield is histologically very different to inflammatory bowel disease, because they involve different areas of the mucosa. Like I said, it would have been great, a huge benefit to mankind if it had been true. But it isn’t.

Well, it’s been fun. And I got a good review on Peyers patches and colitis to pull out next time I have a tricky time … reporting pediatric endoscopic biopsies.

Who?

Thanks very much for this. Really interesting and very worthwhile.

AC will be back with the ‘yes, but’ I’m sure…

KarenJJ

I’ve thoroughly enjoyed myself following this exchange and reading Playing Possum’s posts! The difference between a google education and a university level medical education followed by medical training and practice.

Who?

Yes there really is nothing like a thorough education and professional experience is there? And what is exactly nothing like that? Doing your ‘research’ on the internet.

I wonder when AC will be back? Or if he’ll try one more time before fading away?

Playing Possum

I just like talking about science. I love it!! There’s just so much to explore, and be awed by, and to see in action. And I hate the idea that doctors are hiding something or deliberately ignoring evidence, we wouldn’t do the job (it can be very thankless and soul sucking) if we didn’t care. It’s kind of offensive to suggest otherwise.

I really really mean it when I say how great it would have been if the lancet study was true. Just think of the incredible leap forward for immunology and autism and the activities of the human biome. It would have been amazing. Instead, science was held back for all that time and we lost herd immunity. And kids got Sspe. What a waste of research time and money.

Who?

It’s been really interesting, I know nothing about science or medicine but rely on those who do and enjoy watching knowledge come out to beat noisy ignorance whenever that show is in town.

AC will be back-he’s expunging Wakefield’s name up thread, continuing with his coyness about the true name and nature of his hero.

Perhaps we are now dealing with a ‘he who cannot be named’ in the anti-vax world as well as in Harry Potter.

KarenJJ

I work in a tech field and know very little about biological science. It’s been fascinating meeting doctors and researchers that actually deal with this since becoming a rare disease patient and seeing some of the science being done. There was a breakthrough reported this week in inflammation that I’ve been following with the sort of eagerness I guess I should have reserved for the size of the respective Kardashian arses.

Who?

Sorry to hear you’re meeting too many doctors in their professional guise-I know lots socially and hope to keep it that way!

Well that’s all good news. You seem pretty chirpy so whatever is happening seems to be working. I always hope to be the least interesting patient-medically at least-and have managed it so far, even with the kids in tow. Fingers crossed that continues.

Playing Possum

It’s ridiculous sometimes how excited I get about science-y type things so I hear you on the “eagerness I should have reserved for the Kardashian asses”. Even dumb things like a drop of detergent in an oily pan – there’s such satisfaction in knowing how and why something happens and then … seeing it happen!! And it must be so so cool to see the science of your own disease getting gradually clearer.

The Bofa on the Sofa

It’s ridiculous sometimes how excited I get about science-y type things

Yep, I always figure, you REALLY have to get off on this stuff to be a pathologist. Because normal levels of scientific passion won’t get there.

Nick Sanders

If that’s a dumb thing, I’m a complete idiot, because I love watching it every time.

Alain Couvier

The nonspecific colitis of …….. *is histologically very different to inflammatory bowel disease, because they involve different areas of the mucosa.

Thanks for the clear acknowledgement … when you wish to respond to the further commentary below please feel to do so.

ps I enjoyed the ‘fluff’ but sometimes attempts at sophistication …well.

Alain Couvier

Now over to the socks ….

KarenJJ

Who are you specifically calling a ‘sock’?

Young CC Prof

Can you imagine how fast you’d have to type and how little you’d have to sleep to pretend to be all of us? I couldn’t do it, even if I didn’t have a job and child.

Who?

The doctors who retracted I’m sure would be delighted to have you mentioning them and leaving out Wakefield. Still, what do you care about what actual doctors say?

Playing possum

Fluff?

Playing Possum

Nah, I get it now. I apologise for the overload of words when I first replied to you. I always assume that people have the same knowledge base as me (unless they obviously don’t – children for example). I assumed that you would understand the concepts I was trying to explain (lamina propria vs intraepithelial inflammation, “colitis” vs histological colitis vs inflammatory bowel disease, normal lymphoid hyperplasia in the ilea of children, normal populations of the colon). I apologise if you thought I was trying to mislead you. A non-pathologist doctor would probably have read the Lancet paper and have accepted Wakefield’s interpretation of a normal variant as “non-specific colitis”. I should have been clearer.

Who?

You were very clear even to a non doctor-I just looked at what you were saying, compared that with your links, and saw where AC was fudging-he is the master of obfuscation.

Dr Kitty

Playing Possum, thank you for your patience, as a pathologist, in trying to explain things to AC.

I think AC might want to look up the concepts of incidentalomas and VOMIT, and maybe know when he’s talking to someone who understands the concepts much better than he does.

The Bofa on the Sofa

I always assume that people have the same knowledge base as me

I’ve always said that pathologists are probably the scariest people I know. Not just because of the stuff they know, oh no, a lot of professions have a lot of facts and details you have to know. But the extent that they get off on this stuff, man. It’s kind of like having an affinity for lutefisk. Normal people just don’t do it. As Bill Murray says in Striples, “There’s something WRONG with us! Seriously WRONG!”

That’s what I think about pathologists.

I know a lot of really smart people, but pathologists just scare me.

Alain Couvier

That proclamation of non specific colitis …ouch.

Never mind

Identifying Wakefield as the pathologist … ouch.

Oh dear.

Playing possum

I see. I’ve already apologized for assuming that you knew the difference between a nonexistent entity ‘non specific colitis’ as defined by Wakefield et al, and true colitis.

I was well aware that Wakefield wasn’t the pathologist, I was using the term ‘Wakefield’ as shorthand to describe the entire paper. I think I even mentioned that Wakefield (the person) had the slides reviewed by his own pathologists.

You still haven’t acknowledged that the colitis described in Wakefield isn’t a real entity. I’ve presented you with plenty of information (not just my own statements) that confirms that what was reported in Wakefield (with the exception of the three ‘focal active colitis’ biopsies and the one lymphocytic infiltrate) was in fact normal histology.

KarenJJ

You know, all that science-y stuff you’ve been going on about over the past few posts. That fluff. I think it broke ACs google page.

yugaya

Yup, you are “fluff” and he is “medical science”. Thanks for breaking it down so that even I could understand it. 🙂

Alain Couvier

That’s OK

yugaya

*checks whether her comment was maybe misworded or misdirected or mislabeled*

*nope, it wasn’t, it still says clearly yugaya to Playing possum at this end of the internet*

*wonders why anyone else would in any way assume any part-taking in what Playing possum was thanked for directly in that comment*

*gives up*

Playing Possum

you broke the disqus!

ETA – I’m still not convinced that AC understands that what the Lancet paper reports is a) a variation of normal, and b) not true colitis.

yugaya

He started it! ::)))

yugaya

He never acknowledges hearing or understanding anything that contradicts him, instead he moves on and takes the goalposts with him.

Playing possum

All I can think of now is that scene from Father Ted where Dougal is guarding the corner flags …

Who?

It was interesting how cagey he was about acknowledging Wakefield by name-Is it that he knows Wakefield is a charlatan, and that others may have negative associations with the name; or that he believes the findings were somehow stolen from him by Wakefield.

It must be an odd and lonely life, flogging a dead horse in between being ritually humiliated.

Nick Sanders

The other day he thanked me for a compliment I gave to fiftyfifty1.

Who?

AC is very needy and a tiny bit egotistical, if he sees anything at all postive anywhere he assumes it is directed at him.

Or his sarcasm meter has a calibration error.

Who?

Do carry on, don’t let making a fool of yourself slow you down.

You’re doing a better job of showing the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of your position than anyone who disagrees could ever do.

Who?

Can he stick the flounce this time though? That is the really interesting question here, since Playing Possum has cleared up the actual question.

Alain Couvier

Well so ends that issue …again .

Nick Sanders

Funny how you ask for citations but never give any.

yugaya

“The parents in the original Lancet study reported…”

“After the allegation of an adverse reaction to MMR was eventually recorded in 2001, it became more dramatic in subsequent accounts. Thus,in 2001 the description was: “Distressed after injection. Had fever. Eyes glazed, dilated and fixed.” E’s account became more florid over time, with references to screaming, jolting, spasming and a persistent
vegetative state. In her final statement she said that: “M died within six hours of the MMR.” In the witness box she gave a full account of theevents on the day on which the MMR was administered and M’s reaction toit. E acknowledges in her final statement that she uses certain words and phrases in her own particular way. For example, for her the phrase
“vegetative state” means “slipping in and out of consciousness, not responding and appearing lifeless.” And her use of the word “died” to describe what happened to M means “stopped breathing and lost consciousness””

“The authority’s submission was that “E” was a case of “factitious disorder imposed on others” (previously known as “Munchausen”s syndrome by proxy”). The case before the court was that the fraudulent MMR injury was a concoction by the mother to get attention for herself, and that the quack remedies were instruments of control.”

” Also worth noting is that this individual showed developmental issues well before the MMR vaccine.”

Reading all of this reminded me of the class when we dwelled on semantic issues of animacy in nouns. It’s a rather simple concept across most of the languages of being *alive -* when you are “dead”, just like the concept of not being injured by a vaccine relies on you having documented signs of “vaccine injury” months before being vaccinated.

Pregnant Guest

Thanks for asking this. I also vaccinate on schedule, and admit I haven’t really looked that far into it (because…I trust science and my doctor…) But every once in a while one of the anti vax rants that come up constantly on my facebook feed gives me pause, simply because I don’t know the counter argument. I frankly don’t have the time or the know-how to find the counter argument, and I usually have far more pressing concerns to discuss w/my pediatrician. The stories about (non-autism) vaccine injury are the ones that scare me most. Maybe I’ll add Dr. Offit to my to-read list. (To reiterate, none of it scares me enough to stop vaccinating- I’m an anxious mom, but I know better than to let random internet screeds affect medical decisions for my family!)

Andrew Lazarus

One of the lead plaintiffs in the Autism Omnibus proceeding had the indignity of experts’ showing her daughter’s autistic behavior in home movies, before the shots.

Now, in the 1 in a million case of vaccine-induced encephalitis or meningitis, absolutely there can be brain damage and permanent developmental deficits (as was just as true with the diseases). But in the vast majority of these cases, the doctor visit is a condensing point around vague fears that were already evident. And then, Happy Days, Andy Wakefield gave them someone to blame, and someone to sue.

What causative factor do you mean? I don’t think they gave any causative factor for the autistic behavior demonstrated in the home movie, except it was certainly not the MMR vaccination that hadn’t yet happened.

Alain Couvier

So you don’t know and the experts do not know what the causative factor was ?

Is it the skeptic community position that vaccines, even MMR has no intersection with human physiology, neurology or immunology ?

Andrew Lazarus

No, what I said is that no one in the mainstream community (not the skeptic community) believes MMR causes autism even before it is injected. I would have thought that obvious, but the epistemological methods of the crank community are hard to parse.

Alain Couvier

So at what age was a specific diagnosis of Autism given to these children then ?

Or is that something else you don’t know ?

Who?

What children, and anyway what does it matter?

If you’re going to do a chorus of the post hoc ergo propter hoc blues, you will get roundly dissed.

Andrew Lazarus

What color PJs were they wearing? Or is that something you don’t know?

Alain Couvier

It’s a pity your argument fell apart so quickly. When you have something more insightful get back to me.

Andrew Lazarus

Causation is irrelevant to this discussion, inasmuch as it is not the vaccine, which had not yet been administered. On your “logic”, until the end of the 19th Century when the cause of typhus was understood, it would be quite alright to go with the idea Jews were poisoning the wells, no matter how little evidence there was for that.

Your epistemology here is bankrupt.

Alain Couvier

Is there some reason why you don’t seem to grasp even the basics of the Lancet study or Autism such as the key concepts of –

Neurodevelopmental and Regression ?

Andrew Lazarus

Where in the Lancet study do they discuss how future injections of MMR cause autism?

Alain Couvier

Nor do you seem to understand simple concepts of genetic risk or two hit insults ?

The skeptic mind is fascinating.

Who?

It would be the kind of nonsense that would fit nicely into what AC coyly refers to as The Lancet Study.

He won’t mention his idol Wakefield. It must be hard to on one hand still believe in him and on the other to be too embarassed to mention him.

Who?

Can you stick the flounce this time though?

Actually, to be fair last time was more of a disappearance when you realised what a fool you had made of yourself.

KarenJJ

If someone knew what caused autism we’d have a win for science and could finally put that MMR issue to rest.

Who?

Who says there needs to be a causative factor?

But if this particular child was displaying symptoms of autism before she had the vax-as the mother’s home movies showed-then surely the vax could not have caused the autism.

Or is this an incorrect assumption?

Nick Sanders

Vaccines travel through time, everyone knows that.

Who?

Forgot, sorry, back to the bottom of the class for me!

KarenJJ

What happened to you Who? ? Did you recently get a vaccination?

Nick Sanders

He’s getting one next week.

Who?

Well I did have an MMR booster back in October, and it did give me a red lump on my arm for a few days, perhaps it stole part of my brain too!

Though thankfully the tum is fine.

Dr. W

I bet she still has not gotten her boys their MMR. I bet she has vaccinated for polio and DTaP, and is being purposefully vague in her language, because she is tired of taking fire.

Red Ear Reviewer

I’m seeing a lot of pseudo-libertarian rants against vaccination (and fluoridation) — not about the value of vaccines, but about personal rights being violated. They seem to have a knee-jerk response to anything done by government — even when it is the very best of government. They should be applying their own “non-aggression principle” to themselves when they put others at risk when they don’t vaccinate their own kids.

Sara O’Brien Farmer

Dr. Amy, you should check out Modern Alternative Mamma’s latest post complaining about people “trashing the natural birth movement”. I would love to hear what you think of her. It won’t let me paste the link here.

Keep on giving it to people straight!

Guest

Well, she says that no healthy child ever died from the flu. They all had underlying conditions. Of course. I wonder f she would be willing to say that to the family’s of those completely healthy children who died of the flu this season and last just in my local town?

Well, she says that no healthy child ever died from the flu. They all had underlying conditions.

The technical name for this rhetorical fallacy is No True Scotsman and it applies just as well for organic-raised kids who get sick: someone must have smuggled in a Big Mac.

Alain Couvier

Would it not be important to identify groups of infants and children at higher risk of illness or death ?

Or is this something the skeptic community disagrees with ?

Who?

Your point has nothing to do with AL’s point. Everyone wants to know how to better target all kinds of medicine-to suggest otherwise is wrong.

That has nothing to do with the kind of thinking that says that only a person with underlying conditions (or indeed, that a person who is stupid) dies of the flu.

Andrew Lazarus

I submit that hardly refutes the obvious No True Scotsman nature of this argument.

Alain Couvier

Puzzling then ? Do you not think it important for treatment options and care that differing factors are identified ?

Andrew Lazarus

You are, of course, quibbling. At least in flu deaths I’ve seen in the newspaper, I’ve read of babies described as healthy until they get sick. The antivaxers’ original imputation that death from flu just can’t be something that happens to healthy people, not that postmortem discovered hitherto unknown problems.

Young CC Prof

Personally, I want no children to die of flu, previously healthy or not. There are two things we can do to prevent pediatric flu deaths:

So you vote to bypass strategy 1 (cost $20 per child) and rely exclusively on strategy 2, with a higher risk of side effects and astronomically higher cost. Who’s the pharma shill, again?

Young CC Prof

Of the over 300 confirmed pediatric deaths from h1N1 during 2009-2010, at least 100 had NO preexisting health problems. Most of the rest were basically healthy kids with asthma or something, kids who would almost certainly have lived to grow up if they hadn’t caught it.

Alain Couvier

Asthma or something ? Do you not think a life threatening respiratory disease may be a fairly important observation for due care and treatment in the future ?

Alain Couvier

1. We need to facilitate a variety of controls and protocols to
reduce medical errors including vaccine implementation – that cost
200,000 lives per annum.

2. We need to supply and implement the best practice solutions and vaccines to reduce mortality, morbidity and raise the quality of life not only for children in the Western World but those that live in other countries without the resources or self sufficiency to do so. Regardless of Race, Gender, Age, Sexuality or Spirituality.

3. We need to understand that there is a complexity to vaccine administration that is not yet clear, because our knowledge of human physiology, neurology, immunology and genetics is not complete.
Understanding can reduce morbidity, save lives and enhance quality of
life.

4. Each and every child has the right to high quality, personalized health care including vaccines that undertakes to fully consider and understand their, health status, physiology, neurology , genetics and any other factors including race, gender, sexuality, spirituality, socio-economic and to abide by the principles of ‘do no harm’.

5. Each of us is a member of a wider community as such we have an obligation to support all the members of that community with thoughtful decisions whether we choose to vaccinate or not to vaccinate. These discussions should be in conjunction with a sincere and honest dialogue with a family physician, pediatrician or other relevant medical professional ie neurologists. When harm is done either directly or indirectly through vaccine implementation then we should all have the right to speedy decision making that is itself thoughtful and non adversarial, in regards to compensation.

Who?

So what proportion of these medical errors are vaccine related?

Wren

Is this supposed to be meaningful? You have copied your own previous posts as though repeating yourself changes something.

Who?

He’s added some bits in an attempt to soften his essentially anti-vax, anti-science, egotistical and paternalistic message.

yugaya

I edit for clarity, I’m a non-native speaker and often I only catch that my wording is wrong or not adequate after I post a comment. If someone has already commented on the initial statement as is, it’s probably better and more honest to address the things in the follow up comments along the lines of ….what I was trying to say…instead of editing out a whole line of argumentation.

Joe

I’m glad my parents chose to vaccinate.

Thanks mom and dad!

Alain Couvier

Joe , birthbuddy, who? …. it’s getting awfully crowded Mike.

birthbuddy

So, AC, how do vaccines work?

Alain Couvier

meh

birthbuddy

Point well made.

Who?

At least he’s less prolix than many of our trolls here, though he does share HCM’s conviction that we are all the same person posting under different ‘personas’.

KarenJJ

Why does that surprise people? around 80-95% of people tend to vaccinate. Pro-vax is by far the majority position, especially amongst medical people like many of the people that post on this blog.

Alain Couvier

Unfortunately your opinion that intellectual disability is an infectious disease ‘cured’ or ‘protected” by vaccine is the point that should be noted.

It’s not.

Who?

Did you hit your head? It’s just you seem a little dazed and confused.

birthbuddy

Nice try.
Still just a dodge.

birthbuddy

We all know that FragileX is the single biggest contributor to intellectual disability.
Get a grip and look up sarcasm. My comments are directed at your very unique brand of stupidity.
The ‘AC-S-Ag’ would be the target of the vaccine in your case.
Your biggest mistake is that you thought you were going to pop in and enlighten a bunch of uneducated pro-vaxxers.
This site’s regulars include many medical specialists, doctors, nurses, scientists, epidemiologists.
You don’t get away with spouting crap here.
You came, you played, you lost.
Get over it.

Alain Couvier

That moment has arrived. Let the backpedaling begin!

Seems as though the “provaccine” side has taken the lead in the great backpedaling race. Unsurprising really.

My “So Called Antivaccine Position” ..

1. We need to facilitate a variety of controls and protocols to reduce medical errors including vaccine implementation – that cost 200,000 lives per annum.

2. We need to supply and implement the best practice solutions and vaccines to reduce mortality, morbidity and raise the quality of life not only for children in the Western World but those that live in other countries without the resources or self sufficiency to do so. Regardless of Race, Gender, Age, Sexuality or Spirituality.

3. We need to understand that there is a complexity to vaccine administration that is not yet clear, because our knowledge of human physiology, neurology, immunology and genetics is not complete. Understanding can reduce morbidity, save lives and enhance quality of life

… all commentators are of course free to argue against any if not all of these
‘so called antivaccine positions”.

FormerPhysicist

Oh, you are oh so reasonable. But we *are* working on all of those. Researchers are working diligently on reducing medical error. From simple things like checklists in the OR, to standardized medical history forms, to computer screening of pap smears … lots and lots of work.

Complexity to vaccine administration. Weasel words, but yes, immunologists and public health professionals do study that. Otherwise we couldn’t even have recommended schedules. The schedules come from studying what is most effective and least overall risk.

Alain Couvier

I’m not seeing my ideas and principles being expressed on this skeptic site for one … any explanation for that ?

Error … oversight … forgetfulness …”UNeducated” …

“The schedules come from studying what is most effective and least overall risk.”

Apparently the schedules can cause in some cohorts a doubling of mortality … that’s death. I’m not seeing that expressed on skeptic sites either.

But then that’s some of the complexity that is named ‘weasel words”. As a reminder

My “So Called Antivaccine Position” …

2. We need to supply and implement the best practice solutions and vaccines to reduce mortality, morbidity and raise the quality of life not only for children in the Western World but those that live in other countries without the resources or self sufficiency to do so. Regardless
of Race, Gender, Age, Sexuality or Spirituality.

Alain Couvier

Of course this leads inexorably to the next position statement

4. Each and every child has the right to high quality, personalized health care including vaccines that undertakes to fully consider and understand their, health status, physiology, neurology , genetics and any other factors including race, gender, sexuality, spirituality, socio-economic and to abide by the principles of ‘do no harm’.

Of course skeptics can now put forward their opposing arguments – one assumes it will make interesting reading.

ps I haven’t seen principle 4 on skeptic websites either.

Wren

Ideally, I think most people here would like to see all children given access to high quality health care including vaccines. The fact you don’t see that as a major theme on sceptical blogs in no way makes that something pro-vaxers are against.

Alain Couvier

It remains a very interesting omission never the less …

Wren

I have not seen you mention even once that all children deserve access to food and water.

A very interesting omission…

yugaya

” position that all children should be vaccinated without considering their individual health ”

As if an omission to address that position on this blog ever happened. As if this comment I’m quoting and any and all similar ones:

“It is time for sweeping and coercive legislation, with mandatory vaccination administered through the school system without ANY warnings. No opting out for ANY reason. That kid gets the needle no matter what. Because we are not asking sweetheart — this time, we’re telling. And “no” isn’t on the menu.The End.”

In which cohorts can vaccines double mortality? Please provide evidence.

birthbuddy

Crickets.

yugaya

“3. We need to understand that there is a complexity ….that is not yet clear, because our knowledge of human physiology, neurology, immunology and genetics is not complete. Understanding can reduce morbidity, save lives and enhance quality of life.”

Someone has no idea how much “because microbiome” pseudoscience gets debunked around here on regular basis:

Females typically develop higher antibody responses and experience more adverse reactions following vaccination than males. These differences are observed in response to diverse vaccines,including the bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccine, the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, the yellow fever virus vaccine and influenza vaccines.

Sex differences in the responses to vaccines
are observed across diverse age groups, ranging from infants to aged individuals. Biological as well as behavioral differences between the sexes are likely to contribute to differences in the outcome of
vaccination between the sexes. Immunological, hormonal, genetic and microbiota differences between males and females may also affect the outcome of vaccination.

Identifying ways to reduce adverse reactions in females and increase immune responses in males will be necessary to adequately protect both sexes against infectious diseases.

Whilst flippancy may have a place in debate … it seems medical science prefers to move forward and use these insights into the human microbiome for the benefit of children.

It is an interesting observation that researchers are acknowledging and coninue to explore sex differences in vaccines.

See “so called antivaxxer” principles No 2.

Please feel free to provide the skeptic arguments against …

1. Exploration of the effect of the microbiome on vaccine safety or efficacy ?

2. The exploration of gender, to personalize and improve vaccine administration to infant girls ?

2.

Nick Sanders

Do you have a point, or did you just intend to post unsourced speculation irrelevant to my post?

Alain Couvier

The point is self evident … skeptics are being left behind by advances in medical science.

Back pedaling does not assist … nor does “EGO”

Nick Sanders

You don’t seem to know the definition of “skeptic” or of “back peddling”.

Alain Couvier

Setting aside ‘defintions” You don’t seem to be arguing against being left behind though …

birthbuddy

Left behind?
You mean vaccines have stopped working?

Alain Couvier

In some cases – Yes.

Waning immunity

Mutation

Nick Sanders

Being left behind from what?

Alain Couvier

Medical science

Wren

Unless those arguments are being used to justify not giving vaccines, those are not anti-vaccine positions.
I have yet to meet anyone who would prefer medical errors not be reduced, whatever side of the vaccine argument they fall on. There is constant work in this area.
No one I know who is for vaccination argues that the developing world’s children do not deserve safe vaccination as well. Poor access to resources is the issue, not a desire to inject third world children with whatever we happen to grab. What are you doing to improve that situation?
Vaccine research continues in many countries, as does research into human physiology, neurology, immunology and genetics. Vaccines have a track record of reducing morbidity, saving lives and enhancing quality of life.
Again, you have an unstated major premise, which is that we should not vaccinate anyone until vaccination is 100% perfect.

Alain Couvier

Unless those arguments are being used to justify not giving vaccines, those are not anti-vaccine positions.

Is the skeptic position that all children should be vaccinated without considering their individual health position ?

That seems to be the very ‘literal’ thinking I have seen expressed time after time …

Any explanation for a lack of thoughtful , critical thinking taking place and being expressed then ?

Alain Couvier

ps Again, you have an unstated major premise, which is that we should not vaccinate anyone until vaccination is 100% perfect.

No I don’t … all that I have said is common sense and a touch of humanity and social justice …

…or is their a skeptic argument against common sense, humanity and social justice ?

Wren

Perhaps you should clearly, with all premises mentioned, state your opposition to vaccines. You have failed to do so thus far.

yugaya

” … all that I have said is common sense”

Common sense in the shape of stating that adult vaccines are deliberately being given to children….”sometimes”.

“and a touch of humanity and social justice …”

Sounds like the same fictional movie I caught on this blog the other day in which similarly globally concerned souls raised their voices for us folks in “third world” places where Big Pharma tests vaccines that kill on ignorant human subjects.

Alain Couvier

Testing vaccines on subjects that have or may have differing physiology,genetics, socio-economic conditions, and other environmental conditions may well be problematic.

Let alone accessing children and parents that would have difficulty in understanding the necessary ethical protocols and outcomes of medical science research.

Former NEJM editor Marcia Angell has an erudite commentary … The Ethics of Clinical Research in the Third World.

Wren

You are failing to realise that the claimed “third world” being referenced here is actually Europe.

Alain Couvier

Explain ?

yugaya

Not just any Europe, European Union.

He doesn’t bother read this blog in such detail, he knows all about it without investigating. Other ways of knowing at work again instead of doing one’s homework.

Alain Couvier

2. We need to supply and implement the best practice solutions and
vaccines to reduce mortality, morbidity and raise the quality of life
not only for children in the Western World but those that live in other
countries without the resources or self sufficiency to do so. Regardless
of Race, Gender, Age, Sexuality or Spirituality.

Whilst you may define it as ‘opposition’ I’m happy to define it as “improvement” “best practice” and ” critical”.

What are the skeptic arguments against principle 2 ?

Skeptics obviously disagree with ‘antivaxxers’ so here’s a chance to express an opinion ?

Wren

Best practice is not denying access to life saving vaccination until such as time that it is perfect.

Alain Couvier

Who is “denying” access ?

Who?

No, antivaxxers (an outlier minority) disagree with the mainstream position on vaccines, which is clear and can be seen by reviewing vaccine schedules in countries across the world.

Tediously overwritten motherhood statements are not helpful to dialogue, assuming dialogue is what you are interested in.

Wren

You do realise your “positions” on their own do not add up to a logical argument against the current vaccination policy in any way, don’t you? There are additional unstated premises.

Alain Couvier

They don’t have you thought that statement through ?

1. We need to facilitate a variety of controls and protocols to reduce
medical errors including vaccine implementation – that cost 200,000
lives per annum.

Current vaccination policy does not appear to have a whole country wide surveillance, investigation and reporting system for vaccine implementation errors ?

Nor are figures present and historical published transparently to the general medical system nor to the general public ?

What are the skeptic arguments against such common sense protocols ?

Wren

Who is “we”?

I live in the UK. The NHS is country wide and has a single reporting system for these and other medical errors.

Alain Couvier

1. Community as in ‘We’ as a community need to…

2. The you can tell the readership the number and outcome for vaccine injuries and errors for years 1994 – 2014 then.

Who?

‘We’ is the giveaway to the egotistical temperament and paternalistic values underlying AC’s positions. ‘We’ know best. ‘We’ will impose our common sense views on all you people who don’t know as much as us, all for your good, of course.

At least this is a welcome rest from ‘all my freedom’, though it is coming out of the same egotistical framework.

Nick Sanders

“Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down by the mind before you reach eighteen.”

I’ll take reasoned conclusions based on sound evidence, thank you.

Alain Couvier

So there is a skeptic argument against common sense …

Who?

That quote is Albert Einstein, I have no idea whether or not he was a skeptic but he learnt and shared a thing or two about science.

Alain Couvier

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
Einstein

Nick Sanders

*Apocryphally* Albert Einstein. The provenance isn’t entirely clear.

Nick Sanders

There’s actually a better one, but it’s not as catchy:

“The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counter-intuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what’s true.”
Carl Sagan

Alain Couvier

You find common sense puzzling ? Not the deepest argument I have seen, but not the worse skeptic argument either …

Nick Sanders

I don’t find it puzzling, I find it wrong. “Common sense” tells us things like the sun going around the earth and heavier objects falling faster. “Common sense” has no place in science, rational thinking backed by evidence does.

Alain Couvier

The skeptic argument then is that all knowledge has been made, especially in regards to vaccines ?

Is it also the skeptic position on common sense not to explore the individual medical and socio-economic differences in vaccine implementation ? Even though research shows that they may well impact and interlink with infant health ?

Nick Sanders

I don’t even know how you got any of that from my post. It has literally nothing to do with what I said.

Alain Couvier

Answer the questions then …

Nick Sanders

I’ll answer the questions once you give a satisfactory answer to how you were told “common sense is not a reliable scientific resource” and came to the conclusion that the proper response was “well what about the socio-economics, huh?”.

Alain Couvier

Common sense mixed with a little science knowledge dictates that environmental factors (socio-economic) need to be considered in any vaccine implmentation program … simply because environment acts on us all, particularly as ‘we’ are an ecology of genes , neurology , physiology, bacteria and virus.

Now over to the skeptic opposition to this ‘common sense’ argument …

Nick Sanders

Because germs give a damn how much money I make?

Alain Couvier

They certainly do.

Who?

Common sense is intellectual laziness combined with paternalism-it’s the equivalent of the ‘because I say so’ argument some parents use with children.

You tell me it’s common sense that this or that should happen, and for you that’s the end of it. If I ask why, ‘common sense’ is the answer. If I disagree about what common sense calls for, and propose something else, we have a hopefully short and certainly fruitlless exchange about why each of our respective understandings of what amounts to common sense is better.

Alain Couvier

Inaction is laziness … promoting safety, exploring ways to reduce mortality and morbidity and increasing quality of life is the antithesis.

There is no end to safety … especially with infant children. It may be of course a utopian goal, but it drives research and makes the world safer.

Who?

Do try, Alain to stick to the point. Following what your idea of common sense leads you to believe is necessary will not automatically lead to safety.

When outcomes are not well understood, action is the refuge of the anxious. You must do something because there is suffering! And then come the calls on common sense, because how could anyone’s experience, goals or needs be different from those of the paternalistic actor?

The thoughtful take time to attempt to truly understand not only what they think they might like to do to feel better in themselves and massage the ego that devised their version of common sense, but what those they propose to act on might find beneficial.

Alain Couvier

Thanks Mike .. I do wonder when you will ‘uncloak’.

When outcomes are not well understood, action is the refuge of the anxious.

Serious medical error is a real event.

You must do something because there is suffering!

Yes

And then come the calls on common sense, because how could anyone’s experience, goals or needs be different from those of the paternalistic
actor?

Sorry I got lost in the faux intellectual meanderings.

The thoughtful take time to attempt to truly understand not only what they think they might like to do to feel better in themselves and massage the ego that devised their version of common sense, but what those they propose to act on might find beneficial.

zzzzzzzzzzz ….

Young CC Prof

But we do consider individual health. We consider allergies, immune compromise and other issues, and sometimes a doctor will say that a particular vaccine should be delayed or not given at all.

“all children should be vaccinated without considering their individual health position” is a classic anti-vaxxer straw man.

Alain Couvier

…and how do “we” ascertain the neurological status of an infant that has a genetic susceptibility to errors in synaptic function , neuroinflammation and a immunological dysfunction ?

Stacy48918

We shake the magic 8 ball that all doctors receive upon graduation.

Seriously, dude, life is chance. Doctors and scientists have made vaccines that are incredibly safe for the majority of the population but nothing is perfect. As our understanding grows of “genetic susceptibility to errors in synaptic function, neuroinflammation and a immunological dysfunction” I have no doubt that alterations will be made.
Only a complete idealist would say “until cars are perfect, I’ll walk everywhere”.

Alain Couvier

Only a complete idealist would say “until cars are perfect, I’ll walk everywhere”.

I haven’t seen anyone making that argument including myself. But if you are going to ignore a patients medical history then that may be neglignce and should be awarded compensation. Or not over to you ?

“Personalized care” does not mean that YOU get to direct your own care in opposition to the recommendations of every major medical organization on the basis of internet “research” and “theories”.

Alain Couvier

So you don’t think a parent has an insight into her infant child’s medical history that a pediatrician may use to provide the best medical care ?

Even though vaccine inserts clearly state a variety of contraindications for vaccine or that a pediatrician may develop a health plan based on his own expertise ?

Is the skeptic argument that parents and pediatricians have no flexibility in health care for infants and it should be mandated by others ?

Stacy48918

In rare instances, can patient insight/intuition lead to a break through in their care? Yes.
But those are exceptionally rare. When you say “insight” or “personalized care” you mean “but I don’t think my special snowflake can handle it because she sniffled 6 times after the last shot so she must be sensitive and 4 other parents on a message board said their special snowflake sniffled 6 times after their last shot so it must be true.”
There is and should be plenty of flexibility in health care – guided primarily by medical studies, not “insight”. Or do you think that medical studies do not have value?
“Vaccine inserts” – B12! B12! Anyone got B12-Vaccine inserts?

yugaya

It’s called clinical assessment, and it does not involve internet when done properly. It’s the best tool we as humans have at the moment, and unless you happen to own a crystal ball it’s also the best thing around to rely on as a parent of “an infant that has a genetic susceptibility to errors in synaptic function , neuroinflammation and a immunological dysfunction”.

Wren

Who has argued for blindly vaccinating all children with no consideration for individual health?

Alain Couvier

Nice wording … nice back pedaling.

Wren

It is your wording and therefore unsurprising you find it nice.

There was no back-pedalling. Perhaps you need to look up the definition of that term?

Who?

Is AC back? Birthbuddy handed him his arse yesterday. It was beautiful-the handing back, obviously, not the arse.

Stacy48918

1. Already being addressed.
2. Already being addressed.
3. Already being addressed.
You are “antivaccine” because until the system is perfect, you will use those excuses to disseminate doubt.

Alain Couvier

Yes there are many “so called antivaxxers” that are doing just that setting aside bias , prejudice and moving forward with the medical science that will reduce mortality, morbidity and increase quality of life.

Nice backpedaling though …keep shaking the Magic 8 ball.

birthbuddy

Backpedalling?
How exactly is that backpedalling?
Everyone agrees the system isn’t perfect but it is better than the alternative.
You are sounding more and more like a nutter.

Alain Couvier

Everyone agrees the system isn’t perfect but it is better than the alternative.

Show me on this skeptic blog where ‘my’ points are consistently raised and solutions given ?

birthbuddy

Everyone agrees that system isn’t perfect but it is better than the alternative.
Which bit did you not understand?
We are all adults here, you are expected to support your own arguments.

Alain Couvier

Show me on this skeptic blog where ‘my’ points are consistently raised and solutions given ?

Is this a fundamental strategy in the skeptic armoury ?
Or can you raise an intellectual question ?

birthbuddy

Here is a question: How do vaccines work?

birthbuddy

I apologize if you find the question personally abusive.

Alain Couvier

You are a troll.

birthbuddy

Now, now AC, don’t get all sensitive now.
You came along to shock us with your knowledge and insights but neither stacked up unfortunately.
That’s about it really.

Alain Couvier

Trolling again.

Stacy48918

It’s HER blog. You don’t get to dictate the content. I bet your “points” are raised on mothering.com. You could “research” there.

Alain Couvier

The question is focused on the lack of content … if skeptics haven’t critically thought through these types of issues then one ponders whether their presumptions are correct.

Medical science moves forward … as simple and complex as that.

fiftyfifty1

My “So Called Antifood Position” ..

1. We need to facilitate a variety of controls and protocols to reduce food poisoning that kills thousands a year. Until this can be accomplished, I oppose the eating of food.

2. We need to supply and implement the best practice solutions on food safety to reduce mortality, morbidity and raise the quality of life not only for children in the Western World but those that live in other countries without the resources or self sufficiency to do so. Regardless of Race, Gender, Age, Sexuality or Spirituality. We should eat no food until this goal is accomplished.

3. We need to understand that there is a complexity to eating that is not yet clear, because our knowledge of cooking, digestion and nutrition is not complete. Understanding can reduce morbidity, save lives and enhance quality of life. Until eating is understood in its entirety, eating should not occur.

… all commentators are of course free to argue against any if not all of these
‘so called antifood positions”

Yea, like those ridiculous graphs with no comment.
How do vaccines work?

Alain Couvier

Go right ahead and make your point… I remain breathless.

Stacy48918

Which is it – you don’t know the answer, or you refuse to answer?

How do vaccines work?

Alain Couvier

or alternatively I see no point in answering inane questions that just randomly pop up without context.

Stacy48918

You make plenty of comments without context, such as the definition of “common sense”.

It’s an easy question, but you’ll only answer it in context. @@

Stacy48918

And in a discussion of vaccines, you find “How do vaccines work?” to be inane?

Telling.

Alain Couvier

Not quite but your almost there …

“an increasing body of epidemiological evidence accumulated since its introduction in 1921 shows that BCG also exerts beneficial non-specific effects ranging from protection against non-mycobacterial
diseases, decreased incidence of allergic diseases, and treatment of certain malignancies. ….and this could have important consequences for our quest for improving vaccination strategies.”

Fancy a “so called antivaxxer” promoting medical science investigations to the vaccine schedules and implementation that could save the lives, reduce the disease burden and improve quality of life for millions of children and infants world wide.

Wait, wait, wait. So which is it – vaccines are responsible for the rise in autoimmune diseases….or they help prevent/treat them?

Alain Couvier

Wait … wait …wait

It’s both !

That’s why we can formulate vaccine implementation and protocols and also use such knowledge to reduce the incidence of targeted infectious diseases as well as reduction of autoimmune / atopic diseases.

Ouch

Stacy48918

So what was your point in posting those graphs? Since you made no comment whatsoever…..

Alain Couvier

The point was self evident … if you didn’t get it …that’s not my fault. I assume a ceratin level of knowledge in this debate.

Stacy48918

Me too.

How do vaccines work?

Alain Couvier

I think the question now revolves around – How do vaccines in non specific ways ?

Any ideas ?

Stacy48918

Dodge.

Alain Couvier

Put up …. make a point … do something other than make inane requests.

birthbuddy

Here is a picture of a mirror.

Alain Couvier

I need a shave.

Stacy48918

In a discussion about vaccines, you think that explaining how vaccines work is inane?

Believe me, I’ve totally made my point. All you had to do to prevent that would have been to answer birthbuddy the first time.

Alain Couvier

You may wish to recall that ‘stupidity’ intellectual disability, is not a disease as such, although it can have a relationship with viral and bacterial infection.

At best the remark was facetious and there would be many including the disabilities community that would find it outrightlly offensive …as I do.

Your point then in supporting such commentary is unwelcome.

Is that clear enough.

Stacy48918

That made sense.

birthbuddy

The sympathy vote dodge.
Usually more effective if you didn’t play along initially.

Alain Couvier

Sympathy from whom ? Do you think the disability community wallows in self pity and requires sympathy ?

You have some remarkable opinions.

birthbuddy

” The point was self evident … if you didn’t get it …that’s not my fault. I assume a ceratin level of knowledge in this debate.”
Sound familiar? That is you calling Stacy stupid.
Hypocrisy much?

Alain Couvier

No it’s not … how many trolling personas do you have ?

birthbuddy

Not what?

deafgimp

I’m ashamed you’re inserting your stupidity into the disabled community as if you are considering your stupidity a disability.

yugaya

“The point was self evident … if you didn’t get it …that’s not my fault.”

Wait, so 400% of all people had Crohn’s disease in 2000? 300% had type 1 diabetes?

Alain Couvier

Ouch

Alain Couvier

No, But try again …

birthbuddy

Now, now AC, don’t be insulting and abusive.
Hypocrite

Alain Couvier

Don’t be a troll

birthbuddy

Just keeping you honest AC.

Alain Couvier

No you stalk , bully, harrass and troll people it gets reported. I’m calling you on it.

birthbuddy

You just called Stacy and the certified hamster midwife stupid.You are the bully.
Here is a picture of a mirror.

Young CC Prof

Where in the graph on the right is the adjustment for population aging, better diagnosis, and in some cases longer survival of the afflicted? Remember that prior to 1920, all children with Type 1 diabetes died before having children of their own.

Alain Couvier

Which side of the graph ?

Stacy48918

Betcha we eat more ice cream than people in less developed countries too.
It’s the ICE CREAM!!!!!
I have an insight!!!!!!

KarenJJ

So is that an issue of vaccines or an issue of access to medical care in less developed countries? I actually don’t know but I suspect that you don’t either even after posting that graphic.

birthbuddy

Here is a picture of a flagpole.

Alain Couvier

Is this an imaginary flagpole … like the stupidity vaccine ?

birthbuddy

Still thinking about that vaccine, aren’t you?

birthbuddy

Here is a picture of underpants.

Nick Sanders

This is still, by far, the most surreal non-sequitur I’ve seen in this entire discussion.

Alain Couvier

It’s thought provoking isn’t it … imagery is so powerful.

Nick Sanders

It provokes thoughts, mostly of “What the hell did he post that for?” and “Does Alain have a point or is he just insane?” variety.

2. We need to supply and implement the best practice solutions and vaccines to reduce mortality, morbidity and raise the quality of life not only for children in the Western World but those that live in other countries…

Now that has been established do you think you can come up with a more intellectual reply ?

Apologies are always accepted …

Ennis Demeter

I already spotted the backpedalling on Diane Rehm last week. An anti vax doctor was denying being anti-vax, saying that all along he had only been advocating for better education, and that his own kids are vaccinated.

SporkParade

SciBabe just had a blog post about this. She crashed the premiere of an antivax movie and spoke with the three leading anti-vax doctors, NONE of whom were willing to label themselves as anti-vax.

In other news, my jerkface cousin is still proudly against vaccinating.

Ennis Demeter

A parenthood podcaster I used to listen to called her friend’s safe childbirth with epidural and c-section a “cookie cutter birth”. That very revealing description says it all. It’s all about seeing themselves as special.

Young CC Prof

But I like cookie cutters. They make fun cookies. Why is a cookie cutter birth a bad thing?

Bugsy

Great question. To me, cookie cutter implies nothing went wrong or out of the ordinary. I loved my son’s cookie cutter birth!

momofone

Give me a cookie cutter birth over a soap-opera-worthy one any day!

The Bofa on the Sofa

Seriously, who wants a birth that is filled with drama? I want it to be as routine as can be.

Young CC Prof

If you had surgery, and the doctor came to you afterward and said, “Absolutely cookie-cutter. Textbook,” most normal people would be happy that nothing exciting happened at that particular time!

Wren

I had a baby! I had a whole other person I was responsible for. We were parents. That was all the drama I needed.

SuperGDZ

I think that some people hate vaccinating their kids to a schedule because their child is UNIQUE. It’s like having a birthplan – if it can’t be personalised to their individual specialness then it’s a nasty assembly line product.

Lauren

I agree! Even when doctors, nurses, other moms tell you that likely your birth plan won’t be totally implementable for one valid reason or another, they go way over the top planning one. Fancy paper, Pinterest boards, photos of what they want… seriously, I’ve seen some that are a binder of demands, cutesy titled ‘My Special Birth Plan’.
UGH.

EmbraceYourInnerCrone

I don’t get this..I just wanted the kid out (it was L.A. in the middle of a heat wave and I was ENOURMOUS)
I would have appreciated a teleporter actually, just beam the baby from my uterus to the bassinet please! No mess, no meconium, no tears/stiches ! Yay!

Dr Kitty

My birth plan is dead simple.

Should I go into spontaneous labour I would like
A) an epidural
And
B) a C Section
Arranged as quickly as possible.
I would like CEFM for the duration of labour until delivery.

I would appreciate if any delays in implementing our wishes are minimised as much as possible and if there are unavoidable delays we are kept informed as much as possible as to the expected timeline and reason for delay.

Under no circumstances do I wish to labour without an epidural, and a VBAC is not a desired outcome.
Please do not offer me non-pharmacological pain relief or suggest “just seeing how labour goes” as alternatives.

Thank you for your assistance.
We’re aiming for an abnormal birth!

lilin

The point shouldn’t be to keep me and my kid safe. The point should be to keep us feeling special.

Alain Couvier

Nice meme .. we don’t place infants in the front seats of cars because of the potential of death.

“Kids in the back seat are 38 percent less likely to be injured in a crash. Partners for Child Passenger Safety at CHOP

Riding in the back seat reduces the risk of death by 30%. SafetyBeltSafe USA

Over 30% of 10 year olds are sitting in the front passenger seat and about 55% of 13 year olds are up front. CHOP

Children riding in the front seat are 40% more likely to be injured in a crash than those riding in the back seat. Safe Ride News May/June 2005 Vol. XXIII, No. 3

14% of kids under age 13 rode in the front seat in 2004. CHOP

Kids riding in the center rear seating position have a 43% lower risk
of injury than those who sit in an rear outboard position. Kallan,
M., et al. “Seating Patterns and Corresponding Risk of Injury Among 0-
to 3-Year-Old Children in Child Safety Seats.” Pediatrics Vol. 121 No. 5
May 2008, pp. e1342-e1347

Restraint Use

80% of child restraints are used incorrectly. NHTSA

“Nearly a third of children ride in the wrong restraints for their age and size. Recent data from the Crash Injury Research & Engineering Network indicate that inappropriately restrained children are nearly three and a half times more likely to be seriously injured than their appropriately restrained counterparts.” National SAFE KIDS Campaign

Carseats reduce the risk of death by 71% for infants and by 54% for children ages 1-4, and reduce the need for hospitalization by 69% for children ages 4 and under. National SAFE KIDS Campaign and NHTSA Child Passenger Safety Technician Program Participant Manual pg. C-4

“As of October 1, 2001, 137 children have been killed by passenger air bags. Approximately 88 percent of all children killed by passenger air bags were either unrestrained or improperly restrained at the time of the crash, including 22 infants in rear-facing child safety seats in front of a passenger air bag. National SAFE KIDS Campaign

83% of children ages 4-8 ride improperly restrained in adult
seat belts. Only 19% of children who should be restrained in booster
seats use them. National SAFE KIDS Campaign

“Every dollar spent on a child safety seat saves this country $32.” National SAFE KIDS Campaign

yugaya

“. we don’t place infants in the front seats of cars because of the potential of death.”

Likewise, we don’t give adult versions of same vaccines to children.

Alain Couvier

Sometimes we do.

Lauren

Know the rule: Cite your source or get out.

Where is this info about ‘sometimes we do [give adult doses to children]’ come from?

Before I open the link, are you implying with that contracted statement that when there are two versions of a vaccine one for adults and one for children, the adult version is consciously on random occasions deliberately given to children (“sometimes”), or are you arguing that evidence of a mistake equals proof that a safety protocol ought to be scrapped altogether as unsafe?

EDIT: “cases of accidental mix-ups”

Alain Couvier

Your comment is unnecessarily convoluted … so mich so it makes little sense. First of all I argue medical error.

You can explain the substantial differences between adult and pediatric vaccines.

yugaya

” First of all I argue medical error.”

No, you didn’t argue anything “first of all”, you made a vague statement “Sometimes we do.” that required clarification of who-does-what-and-how-often in order to argue anything.

So you argue medical error. Yes, medical errors happen. They are documented and investigated. There are professional and safety mechanisms in place that are aimed at minimizing the possibility of same mistakes being repeated in the future and making sure that those who commit such errors face tangible consequences.

No one gives adult vaccines to children deliberately, not even “sometimes”, just like no one in their right mind would “sometimes” ignore the safety recommendations regarding placing infants in front seats.

Alain Couvier

you made a vague statement

Concise not vague – you apparently got it.

So you argue medical error. Yes, medical errors happen. They are documented and investigated.

Cite your source or get out. (Sarcasm) I did note you missed – reported.

How many medical errors were made in regards to vaccine implementation in the United States from 1994 – 2014 ?

There are professional and safety mechanisms …

“Hospitals have been looking for ways to improve quality and operational
efficiency and cut costs for nearly three decades, using a variety of
quality improvement strategies. However, based on recent reports,
approximately 200,000 Americans die from preventable medical errors
including facility-acquired conditions and millions may experience
errors. In 2008, medical errors cost the United States $19.5 billion.”

Oh crap, enough. We get it. Medical errors are bad. But if you have a 100% chance of death without medical care, then the medical errors are a reasonable risk. And they are investigated and we try to fix them.
Just like, yes, vaccines can cause adverse events. But much much much less often than the diseases they prevent.

Alain Couvier

That’s it – the breadth and depth of your argument ?

Here’s another argument then … DTwP is still used in many, many Third World countries, … even with a well known and appalling safety record (By Western Standards)

My position as a so called “antivaxxer” is that is just not good enough and needs to be changed.

If this forum thinks both those positions are wrong kindly argue against them ?

Wren

So…
Your arguments are basically:
1) Vaccines are imperfect.
and
2) Third world children do not have access to the same medical services as those in developed country.
I agree with both of those.
However, imperfect vaccines still beat the higher risks of the diseases they prevent. Even those used in the third world beat the diseases.
And for the record, I am very much in favour of socialised medicine with its access for all and would not object to a worldwide system giving everyone access to good healthcare.

Alain Couvier

I agree with both of those.

In what way … how far does your critical thinking go to these two points ?

How imperfect is vaccine policy and what factors and new knowledge are changing the way we think about it ?

Is a simplistic vaccine implementation policy the only strategy to reduce child mortality , morbidity and quality of life in the Third World ?

Young CC Prof

Why do you think you are the only person who asks these questions? Why do you think the actual experts are incapable of thinking critically about vaccines? Why do you think vaccination is a strategy administered in isolation?

Wren

The risks of the current vaccine policy are significantly lower than those of no vaccine. The reemergence of diseases as vaccination rates drop changes the way I think about it, making me more in favour of vaccines. The constantly changing goalposts of the anti-vaccine movement also does that.

Obviously vaccines are not the only strategy to improve health and quality of life (I assume you did not intend to say reduce quality of life) but they are a relatively inexpensive intervention with a large benefit.

Young CC Prof

Whole-cell pertussis does not have an “appalling” safety record, it has a slightly higher risk of causing seizures than the acellular. It’s also a great deal more effective and requires fewer booster shots.

Alain Couvier

I suppose that ‘appalling’ depends on perspective – it has been withdrawn from every Western health system because of severe adverse events and there is a well evidenced link to a two-fold increase in specific populations of mortality. That’s death.

Sullivan ThePoop

You cannot even imagine how that has something to do with privilege? We also pulled Mercurochrome which has a fantastic safety record because we were worried how the mercury salt would be perceived by consumers. How does that fit into your narrative?

Sullivan ThePoop

It is still used because it does not have an appalling safety record. It works much better than the DTap and it is much safer than getting pertussis.

Stacy48918

“Oh crap, enough. We get it”
But it needs to be PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

yugaya

“100% efficiency or bust!” We need more robots in health care. :))))

There’s this insanely worded written statement that the local antivaxxers are offering the doctors have signed before they will allow their child to be vaccinated, where the doctor has to GUARANTEE that NO SIDE EFFECTS will manifest, and that the vaccine is 100% SAFE AND EFFECTIVE!!!!

Yes, but one of the skills that I use daily is figuring out what people are trying to say. Three people independently gave you the same feedback, you might want to look into that.

I am not going to address the newly moved medical malpractice goalposts, just like I did not bother to “explain the substantial differences between adult and pediatric vaccines”.

None of what you posted makes your initial “sometimes” claim in any way more credible.

Alain Couvier

Yes, but one of the skills that I use daily is figuring out what people are trying to say.

That’s not exactly a special skill.

Three people independently gave you the same feedback, you might want to address that.

That says a bit more about them … than it does about me. But hey …

I am not going to address the newly moved medical malpractice goalposts …

I’m taking that as … you can’t

just like I did not bother to “explain the substantial differences between adult and pediatric vaccines”.

..and again.

This forum is not as “brightly skeptic” as it thinks it is … probably has to do with ego.

yugaya

“That’s not exactly a special skill.”

Yes it is – you have to know how to listen, but that does not seem to fare well on your list of important skills either.

“We don’t deliberately sometimes give adult vaccines to children” is all you needed to address, really.

But, apparently, judging by what and how and why you wrote here, making a point about “this blog” not being “brightly skeptic” enough matters more…”probably has to do with ego”.

Sullivan ThePoop

Now you are falling down the rabbit hole. Your argument started off pretty strong but is getting a little ridiculous now.

Young CC Prof

Did this guy serious just argue that infant vaccines are dangerous because some health workers administered the wrong ones? (Note that bulletin does not say anyone was harmed in the mixup.)

A slightly anxious but rational person’s response to news like this is to double-check any drugs or vaccines before they are administered to yourself or your child. Saying, “No vaccines because the nurse might give the wrong one!” is pretty silly.

Alain Couvier

(Note that bulletin does not say anyone was harmed in the mixup.)

Do you know whether they were harmed or not ?

Please feel free to link to the relevant reports that give the figures for vaccine “mix ups” , errors, contaminations , out of date batches …

Can’t ? Why not ?

Nick Sanders

He’s argued that vaccines are dangerous because putting babies in the front seat of a car is dangerous. After that, I would find it plausible that he would argue just about anything.

Lauren

Not sure what you’re getting at here.
That car seats are safe? That small children shouldn’t be in the front passenger seat?
Is there something specific you were trying to say?

Alain Couvier

Vaccine implementation is a lot more complex than simple memes.

Lauren

Okay.
So, what are you saying?
What is so complex here that we’re all missing?

The meme is making fun of the simplistic view that more = evil, especially if it comes from the medical community. Anti-vaxxers continually pull out weak, irrelevant numbers as arguments, hence the ‘a child today gets four times as many vaccines as the average 35-year-old did when we were kids’ original anti-vax meme and scare tactic.
More, in this case, means more diseases prevented, more lives saved, and improved overall community health.
More airbags is a similar step forward in the progress of atuo safety.
Anti-vaxxers however, want you to make the mental connection to other scary ‘our kids are exposed to more X than we were!’ statements, like ‘children today see 10 times more violence on tv than we did’, etc. etc. It’s a baloney statement that has no specific meaning, but seeks to evoke an emotional response.

If you’re trying to imply that vaccines are somehow exempt from scientific progress and rigorous testing to then be given in a controlled dose schedule supported by the CDC and every other world health institution, you’re doing a very convoluted job of it.

Alain Couvier

What is so complex here that we’re all missing?

If you can’t answer that simple question from the analogy I have given then that is comment enough.

“‘a child today gets four times as many vaccines as the average
35-year-old did when we were kids’ original anti-vax meme and scare
tactic.”

Simple math each vaccine carries a risk of severe adverse event as plainly evidenced on each vaccine insert which a doctor or other health professional should fully disclose to you when giving a vaccine.

Simple risk calculation follows directly from that … of course there is some complexity to the formulas because some vaccines are notorious for substantial adverse events such as the now withdrawn DTwP. (well at least in Western Countries)

Research has shown that when comparing whole cell v acellular vaccines there is an increase of some 238% in adverse events.

Wren

You are making a huge assumption there you are not making explicit.

Are vaccines today equally likely to have severe adverse reactions to those of 35 years ago?

If not, are they even 4 times as likely to?

The antigen load of today’s vaccines is significantly less than that of 35 years ago, even though more diseases are vaccinated against (though not 4 times as many).

Alain Couvier

You are making a huge assumption there you are not making explicit.

I don’t mean to be rude – but what does that statement even mean ?

Are vaccines today equally likely to have severe adverse reactions to those of 35 years ago?

That would depend on of vaccines used 35 years ago are still in use ? DTwP is and it has an appalling safety record it has been withdrawn in nearly every Western country I can think of.

Why ? because of the number of severe adverse events – guess what so called “anti-vaxx” were among the first that advocated for the removal of that vaccines.

Same with thimerosal – or would the commentators on this page like to see these two back in pediatric vaccines ?

Wren

I will try to rephrase more simply.
Your “simple math” is based in part on the unstated assumption that current vaccines carry the same risk as those of 35 years ago. If the risk of severe adverse side effects is lower, as is definitely the case in the DTaP versus DTwP, then your “simple math” does not show what you claim.

I would also like to see evidence for the claim that children receive 4 times as many vaccines as 35 years ago.

Alain Couvier

Au contraire de votre analyse …

Overall vaccine risk to an individual is a mathematical equation that is dependent on the number and risk factors of each vaccine and dosage added to the known adverse events – 35 years ago that list did not include narcolepsy or inflammatory bowel disease for instance or early onset asthma …

In your analysis did you factor in efficacy of DTaP and severe adverse event being the targeted disease ?

Did you analyse the waning immunity of varying vaccines such as DTaP ?

Safe and safer may not be entirely relevant terms.

Sullivan ThePoop

There is no longer any risk of narcolepsy from any vaccine. H1N1 contains an antigen that in a small number of children can cause molecular mimicry that leads to narcolepsy. No one knew what caused narcolepsy before the outbreak in 2009. Now we know certain flu strains cause narcolepsy through molecular mimicry. Since we know that antigen will be sought out and never added to another flu vaccine.
DTaP does not work as intended. The way it is created only neutralizing antibodies will be produced. Neutralizing antibodies will make a vaccinated person immune to the toxins that pertussis creates, but will not make you immune to the bacterium. If there is near 100% DTaP uptake rate, like in Sweden or Mississippi, there will not be any outbreaks even if some people are infected or carriers because without the toxin you still have a bad cough for a long time, but it is less likely to pass it on to others.
I am not sure what vaccine has IBD as a listed side effect.

Sullivan ThePoop

DTP did not have a horrible safety record. It had an increased risk for moderate reactions because it was a huge antigenic load with lots of contaminating proteins from manufacturer. It is still used successfully in many countries.

Nick Sanders

Thimerosal which still hasn’t been connected with any actual health problems?

Nick Sanders

Doubling or even tripling an obscenely tiny number, such as the risk of vaccines, still leaves an obscenely tiny number. 2 or 3 in a million is not meaningfully more than 1 in a million.

Alain Couvier

Unfortunately some of the numbers are not tiny – you should refer to professional research like the Cochrane Collaboration.

Nick Sanders

You should provide your own sources if you are going to make claims.

Andrew Lazarus

In a two-seater car, is it better to use a car seat in the front, or to let the baby crawl around the car? I ask, because I believe the official antivax position is the latter.

I’d love for them to backpedal and talk about how much they vaccinate. Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s going to happen. They’re going to dig their heels in and become stronger in their convictions.

At this rate we are unfortunately going to see a death. Although it is not true that we have had no measles deaths in the last 10 years. We actually had five deaths from measles and 2 from SSPE.

Sullivan ThePoop

Embarrassingly, I took it for true because there were no outbreaks that contained 1,000 people. I should have looked harder and not assumed.

Young CC Prof

Don’t do MANA math! (Remember that mind-boggling argument?)

1000 cases are not necessarily required to find one death. Even if one person in the US contracts measles, it is possible for that person to die. Not likely, but possible.

yugaya

Serbia just declared an epidemic of measles. It is a country with largest refugee population in Europe and many over 20 year olds are not fully or at all vaccinated – 125 confirmed cases in three months, 46 hospitalised, only one case in a fully vaccinated person.

On February 9th, I received a phone call from York Region Public Health, informing me that Griffin, alongside my mother and I, was potentially exposed to the measles virus while attending a newborn weigh-in appointment at my doctor’s office in Markham on January 27th.

Griffin was 15 days old at the time.

I was informed that someone who later developed measles sat in the doctor’s waiting room between 1 hour before and 30 minutes before we arrived. I was also informed that measles is regarded as “airborne” and can stay in the air and on surfaces up to 2 hours after the infected person has left.

I was then asked if I had had the measles vaccine. I had.

Griffin. Griffin had not. Can not.

I was advised to not be around small children. If I worked in such an environment I would be written off work. I do work in such an environment; my home. Where I now sit with Griffin and my 3 year old, Aurelia, who has only been able to get one MMR vaccine so far. She is now, technically, exposed too. We are to sit tight and watch for symptoms: fever, cough, runny nose. If we develop any of these we are to call my doctor and arrange to come in under official medical precautions. We are to wait at home, in isolation, until February 17th, after which the 21 days of possible incubation will have passed and we are clear.

So, Griffin is now Schrödinger’s baby. Simultaneously with measles, and without it. Until he develops symptoms, or until a further 7 days pass. One or other.

And I’m angry. Angry as hell.

I won’t get angry at or blame the person in the waiting room. I would have likely done the same thing…you get sick, you go to the doctor. I have no idea what their story is and I will never know. But I do know one thing:

If you have chosen to not vaccinate yourself or your child, I blame you.

I blame you.

You have stood on the shoulders of our collective protection for too long. From that high height, we have given you the PRIVILEGE of our protection, for free. And in return, you gave me this week. A week from hell. Wherein I don’t know if my BABY will develop something that has DEATH as a potential outcome.

DEATH.

Now, let’s unpack this shall we. All out on the table.

You have NO IDEA what this “potential outcome” means. NO IDEA. I do. Unfortunately, I do.

You think you are protecting your children from thimerosal? You aren’t. It’s not in their vaccine.

You think you are protecting them from autism? You aren’t. There is no, none, nada, nothing in science that proves this. If you want to use google instead of science to “prove me wrong” then I am happy to call you an imbecile as well as misinformed.

You think you are protecting them through extracts and homeopathy and positive thoughts and Laws of Attraction and dancing by candlelight on a full moon? You aren’t. I PROTECT YOUR CHILD. We protect your child. By being concerned world citizens who care about ourselves, our fellow man, and our most vulnerable. So we vaccinate ourselves and our children.

You think you are protecting them by letting them eat their shovel full of dirt and reducing antibiotics and eating organic? You aren’t. As an unvaccinated person you are only protected by our good graces. WE LET YOU BE SO PRIVILEGED thanks to our willingness to vaccinate ourselves and our children.

And you would be the first to line up if you had an inkling of what the death of a child feels like. You would be crawling through the streets on your hands and knees, begging, BEGGING to get that vaccine into your precious babies because that is what I would have done, if I could, to save my daughter.

The fact is, there was no vaccine for her. Not for her illness. And she died. She died at age five and a half, and she is gone.

And I watch these arguments trotted out on Facebook and twitter citing false science and long discredited“studies” that just won’t stop and Jenny McCarthy quotes and “it’s MY choice” to not vaccinate…and I think…what would you have done if your child lay dying? Would you give them a scientifically proven, safe and effective vaccine and risk the minuscule likelihood of a side effect? Or would you let them go, knowing that at least they won’t develop autism (which they wouldn’t even develop anyway because SCIENCE)?

And don’t you DARE tell me that you wouldn’t vaccinate them then. Don’t you dare. You have no idea what it feels like to go through what we went through.

I read it last night and started crying, it’s awful. I hope that they’re all okay. Also, losing a 5.5 year old? That is absolutely heartbreaking, it’s making me tear up just thinking about it. The poor mum 🙁

Bugsy

What a beautiful little boy. I hope he’ll come through this next week without suffering any consequences caused by anti-vaxxer idiocy.

Samantha06

I am so sorry this sweet boy is going through this.. praying things will be OK..
(Edited)

Ironically, the fact that he’s so very young may help protect him, since his maternal immunity probably hasn’t eroded yet.

I really hope that’s how it works out, anyway.

Lauren

This is such a heart-breaking story – to lose one child, and then have to face the possibility of losing another? I know she isn’t bent on finding the person who was infected in the waiting room.. but I think I might be if I were in here position.
This happened right down the highway from me, and I know that here in Ontario every single medical institution, including the GP office, ASK YOU if you have any highly-contagious symptoms and then give you a face mask to wear if that is in fact, why you are visiting the Dr. Clearly this person just said “oh no, no coughing, no fever ….” when asked, to forgo having to wear the mask.

People will always fib about that, so there’s only one way around it — separate waiting rooms for the healthy, ‘annual check-up’, well-baby, etc. patients, and for the “I don’t feel good” patients. This should never have happened to this family, or the dozens of others all over North America.

On an off-topic note… it is a relief to have my previously considered ‘crazy’ fears that measles would spread to Canada before or at the time of our son’s birth this May finally vindicated.

NO SHOTS, NO VISITS, NO EXCEPTIONS.
We are already telling family and friends — prove you’ve had a booster, or there’s the door.

Mac Sherbert

My kids pediatrician used to schedule all well baby visits first thing. We never waited in the waiting room and were taken to a room immediately. He was very old schooled and I loved him. He retired a couple of years ago and when my kids get sick I miss him. Our current doctors have separate waiting rooms. This is why when my kids get sick I hate taking them to the urgent care..I’m always thinking they will catch something worse than what they already have.

Lauren

Sigh. It’s a difficult problem.
Your Ped sounds like he was really great!
Our OB is also really great – we see her in the hospital, in a fairly secure wing, but again, the people coming and going, bringing elderly parents to appointments may be carrying who knows what.

Bombshellrisa

I am now worried about that too, there were three kids with measles here who accompanied one of their parents to urgent care. Apparently the parents thought the kids just had a cold of some sort and the doctor ended up concentrating on the kids instead of the spider bite the parent came in with. This all went down up the road from me, and everyone was worried because the parents had taken the kids to the grocery store and library and who knows where else. My son was about five months old at the time and knowing those kids had been at the store I grocery shopped at with him and at the library we go to for story time had me in tears.

Mac Sherbert

I’ve felt guilty for over a year because my son had whooping cough and I took him everywhere and sent him to school. If I had any idea, that’s what he had I would not have done that!!! It wasn’t an actual tested case so the school wasn’t informed, but I insisted his teacher email and tell all the other parents in his class. One of the students he was close to had a new baby in the family and I was very worried about that baby. (And yes he had been vaccinated. I really think they need to change when kids get the booster for Tdap. If I had known it was in the community, at his school and that it’s effectiveness ran out I would have had him get a booster when I had my last baby.) I didn’t used to worry about germs, but I’m fast becoming paranoid.

Young CC Prof

That’s why pertussis outbreaks are so hard to stop. It looks like a cold for weeks before it occurs to you to see a doctor, by which time contacts have already been exposed long since.

Mac Sherbert

Exactly! When I told other parents of kids I knew he had been around I always explained that it doesn’t start with a cough. Actually, he only ran a fever for one day and then seemed fine until 2 weeks later. At one point he did throw up at school and we (me, the teacher and school nurse) couldn’t figure out what had made him sick…and chances are looking back it was the pertussis.

Bombshellrisa

What made me mad about the whole thing is the family doesn’t vaccinate and had recently got back from the Phillipines. Thank goodness nothing came from it.

Bugsy

I understand the vindication you’ve felt over this, as strange as it may seem. I’ve felt the same way the past few weeks, that this outbreak vindicates why we avoid anti-vaxxers…and that other mainstream families now better understand our fears & concerns. (My son is 2 and fully vaccinated but picks up every germ that passes by. We stopped allowing play dates with anti-vaxxers during last year’s measles outbreak here in BC.)

ETA: I wish there were no reason to feel the vindication and that this whole outbreak didn’t exist, however.

Nooo. We were in San Francisco last week as well, but thankfully it looks like our paths wouldn’t have crossed w/ this person. (All fully-vaccinated, but still on guard…son too young for his second MMR.)

Is this supposed to prove anything? An anonymous voice put up on youtube in 2009?

JenRPh

I think this woman is an idiot. She says clinical trials are shady? Does she not know about IRB? Of course trial meds are found to be toxic…that’s one of the reasons we do trials…to discover this information before we start to use them in the general public.

anonymous

She sounds canned. IE it sounds like she’s been edited. Just my 2 cents.

Young CC Prof

I know someone who worked for NASA and will tell you the real truth about the moon: It’s actually made of cheese. The dairy industry conspired with the government to cover it up. Those moon rocks? They’re just volcanic!

KeeperOfTheBooks

*gigglesnort* As a former bookstore worker, I can tell you that every crazy out there eventually goes to a bookstore to find *drumroll* PROOF!!!ELEVENTY!! that there’s a CONSPIRACY!!! to cover up THE TRUTH! That one I hadn’t heard before. 😀
I did hear the one about Bush and Cheney collaborating with Halliburton to lay a pipeline from the moon to Earth to secretly drain the moon of its oil reserves, though. Does that count? Had to keep a straight face, too…

The Bofa on the Sofa

I did hear the one about Bush and Cheney collaborating with Halliburton to lay a pipeline from the moon to Earth to secretly drain the moon of its oil reserves, though. Does that count? Had to keep a straight face, too…

“Did you just say, ‘Lay a pipeline…’?”

KeeperOfTheBooks

*shrug* Float? Place? Set?

“Lay” seemed to be the correct term in the context–at least, in as crazy a context as it was…

Nick Sanders

Of all the layers of stupid on that, I think “secretly” might be the dumbest. Because no one would notice a giant pipe being put between the planet and moon.

KeeperOfTheBooks

Yeah, I thought it best not to engage him any further than I had to, but that occurred to me, as well.

I did think briefly about handing him a kid’s book on astronomy to explain Why That Doesn’t Work, Sir, but decided it would be a very, very lost cause.

JenRPh

I was not aware that Poland was a third-world country.

Wren

Of course it is. It’s not the US so it must be.
Europe has absolutely no controls on things like human testing.
Ugh.

JenRPh

And the people you can’t find are the ones who had the adverse reactions. Obviously they were not just lost to follow-up.

Wren

Obviously!
People who had adverse reactions would never, ever say so. They would just quietly fall off the face of the planet, especially in third world countries with areas set up for human testing like Poland.

yugaya

Is that why always before getting the next shot we get asked about any previous adverse reactions and they are noted down in official medical file? Maybe it’s because so many people die from vaccines and no one bothers to report, given how ignorant we are (not Poland, but close enough).

demodocus’ spouse

I’ll never forget that! My geography teacher had to give us maps with several borders hand drawn, including between Czech Republic and Slovakia, as well some of the ex-Soviet nations. And Germany’s scribbled out. I hope she got updated maps for the next class!
ed for clarification

yugaya

Yup, no follow up system in place whatsoever, once we get back to “our” third world villages thinking we’ve just had a shot against cancer and die of poisonous illegal test vaccines no one reports that.

That document is made of awesome. There are so many things to love about Hungary, not just the mathematicians.

yugaya

Spas! Melancholy so intrinsic that you will instantly become a lifelong optimist after talking to only a few people! Bartók!

OT: this morning I picked up the letter saying that kids and I got the citizenship, so I’m now officially qualified to tell you what Hungary is like. :)))

Dr Kitty

I was inter railing around Europe in September 2001 with a friend.
After spending a fairly horrible few days in hostels full of people gathered around TV sets streaming 24/7 footage of 9/11 we ended up in Budapest.
In a hostel where the beds weren’t ready when we arrived, but the landlady very helpfully suggested we go and spend the afternoon in the Szechenyi baths to recover from the overnight train from Munich and to “wash away the sadness”. It was a wonderful idea, and both of us felt much, much better for it. We came back to clean sheets and a bottle of red wine as an apology for the delay in getting us settled in.
I liked Hungary 🙂

There’s nothing current about them actually, it’s about deliberately re-creating Horthy era in all aspects of life like constitutional rights, architecture, public education, minorities…

yugaya

Me neither. I’m a few countries over in the wrong direction so greetings to you all from the darkest corner of the planet called European Union. 😀

KarenJJ

I get the impression that most anti-vaxxers have done very little travel, have very narrow life experiences and have very limited circles of friends and family. Not sure if that’s true but it’s the impression I get.

Montserrat Blanco

It did not look like a third world country to me when we were there on holidays, but, you know, I live in Europe so I might be mistaken. The European Union has never been really developed…

Montserrat Blanco

So if I post a voice message on You Tube saying that the anti-vaccines movement is directed by people that conspirates in order to have some children killed by measles, you will believe that too????

Kathleen

My anti-vax friends have disappeared from Facebook and the like. Anytime I post something, or other friends discuss something vaccine-related we keep waiting for them (really, I think I only have one) but the silence is deafening, considering all the posts and discussions we used to have after they posted something anti-vax

AL

I know of one anti-vax person that said “Thank God I homeschool.” But for the most part it has been crickets.

Roadstergal

Because school is the only place kids pick up VPDs.

militarywife

All my anti-vax FB friends have been unfriended. Had a field say when six of them shared a Dr. Bob post about a year ago about how measles ain’t so bad. I was kind enough to tell them why. Same with lactivists, chemtrail people or anti-GMO. I may still have some on there, but that is because they don’t post about that kind of stuff nor do they unfriend me when I post about vaccines.

Heh. I hit my limit and have now twice posted “if you are antivax, unfriend me” with a list of reasons why. Only get positive responses, and haven’t noticed any unfriends. So I don’t miss em if they’re gone…

Exactly. And I love how she uses Wakefield as her example…does she not realize that he has been COMPLETELY discredited and had his medical license revoked?

attitude devant

I got into it on FB with a Wakefield fan. It was HILARIOUS! She assured us all that he had been completely vindicated. When I replied that he’d been thrown out of the Royal College and the original article in the Lancet withdrawn, she informed me that ONE of the authors of the original article had refused to join in withdrawing the article. THAT in her mind was complete vindication.

Dr Kitty

Anyone who can read the entire GMC findings on Wakefield and his colleagues and feel that man is anything other than an unethical fraudster I don’t know.

He was struck off the register by the GMC, meaning he can never practice medicine in the UK again. Their reasons were that he brought the profession into disrepute by his unethical behaviour and callous disregard for his patients.

Wakefield’s autobiography, BTW is called “Callous Disregard”, again, that gives an interesting insight into his psyche.

Young CC Prof

If you get crunchy points for being fired by your doctor, think about how many crunchy points a doctor can get, being defrocked!

Cobalt

It’s a thin thread, but rotavirus vaccination can make babies have crazy poo for a few days. It’s a far cry from permanent gut damage leading to malnutrition leading to autism, and it has nothing to do with Wakefield’s fraudulent claims about MMR, but there is a vaccine/poop connection that occurs in the real world.

Young CC Prof

Yes, that is true. My baby’s poo changed for a few days after his rotavirus vaccine. But if a kid had “permanent gut damage” that caused malnutrition, there would be plenty of signs other than a developmental disability. Stunted growth for starters.

ACG

I live in Orange County and lots of people around me don’t vaccinate and apparently a good portion of them will also lie about it when asked directly. Any thoughts on how to handle that situation? Also, they tend to define ‘vaccinated’ differently that my family. For example, a woman recently told me that her kids are “fully” vacinated, but they aren’t a ‘super vaccinated family who follow every single vaccine recommended by their ped.’

Roadstergal

This reminds me of the TDS segment where the reporter asks the Marin woman if her children are vaccinated, and she said, “…for the most part…”

There needs to be a phrase like “vaccinated according to the proper schedule,” but pithier, for use in such circumstances as you describe. The situation is a lot like the person finding the note on their windshield saying, “I hit your car and a lot of people are watching, so I have to pretend to put my contact information here.”

momofone

I thought of that segment too. If they’re so comfortable with their decision, I wonder why they feel compelled to lie about it.

The Bofa on the Sofa

I wonder why they feel compelled to lie about it.

Because Bob Sears tells them to.

Not kidding.

Amy M

Sure. Easier to ride the herd immunity if your neighbors don’t know. And not get branded with the scarlet NV.

The Bofa on the Sofa

And be sure to not let them know so they don’t know you are sponging off them. They might not like that.

Felicitasz

OT, this windshield note is the best 😀

Felicitasz

This must mean something like my family – I sincerely hope, at least… I live in NC, I am a pro-vaccine mom, never been otherwise, I am Hungarian, which is another third-world country from Europe 😉
My son is vaccinated according to schedule. However, he does not have every single optional vaccine that was offered, for example, he had no rota virus vaccination, and, for another example, I myself opted out of the flu vaccine this year (my husband and son got it). So we are not a “super vaccinated” family, but it goes without saying that every single vaccine in the protocol was/ is done as scheduled, and when we moved from Canada to the US, we made sure that the additional shots (Hep A, I think, for my son, and a different requirement concerning meningitis and tetanus boosters for grown-ups… but I may not recall every detail correctly) were taken care of too.
My son went to a Montessori preschool, and now goes to a Montessori school. It sounds sooo very alternative but neither institution accepts students without vax documents handed in with their application. I remember that a few years ago I was shocked upon finding out that this is not a matter of fact thing everywhere.

just me

Since when is rotavirus optional?? And why would you skip the flu vaccine?

Young CC Prof

Rotavirus might not have been mandated when he was an infant depending on when and where he was born, since it’s relatively new. But yeah, unless you have a reason not to get the flu vaccine, I think everyone should.

Sullivan ThePoop

True and I believe you can’t get it after 18 months

Mishimoo

Here, you have to have it on time or not at all. One of my daughters missed out on it by a few months, and was ‘too old’ to get it. (It’s done at 2, 4, and 6 months.) I am so glad it’s available, I used to catch every tummy bug around. I know it only covers some strains, but it is still much better than nothing.

Felicitasz

Yes, rota is optional to this day in Hungary, too, and so is the varicella vax and quite a number of other vaccinations.
Re flu shot – I too think that everyone should; I too got it every year since we have moved to North America. Vaccinating people do tend to have a reason for taking their child to a flu shot and not getting one themselves :S

Siri

Good choice skipping the rotavirus vaccine! My baby had rotavirus, having been born prior to the vaccine becoming available, and it was great. It gave him nappy rash so severe that his bum looked badly sunburnt, and for ages afterwards I couldn’t even put cream on him without making him scream in pain. I really recommend the experience.

Felicitasz

I am so glad you approve of my choice made together with our ped. Makes me feel very reassured indeed.

Rota vaccine was optional in Ontario when my son was born, and recommendations went according to risk groups based on age, birth weight, health issues, day care enrollment, and the likes.
Thank you for your personal attention.

Bugsy

Ermmm…that’s a tricky one. I try to Facebook stalk people whose vax status I question. One of our neighbours wanted a playdate with us, and I could see from her (public) wall that she had some anti-vax memes up. Good enough for me to not feel comfortable with her van status.

Liz Leyden

To play Devil’s Advocate, they may lie because they have a (legitimate) medical reason to delay or skip certain vaccines, and may not want to discuss their kid’s medical condition. We had to delay my daughter’s 6 month, flu, and rotivirus vaccines, and her brother’s rotavirus vaccine, because of her surgical schedule.

KarenJJ

Maybe, but if it was recommended or not recommended by their ped, I doubt it would be not vaccinating due to a legitimate medical issue. We had doubts over whether my daughter could get the MMR and had to take that question to her specialists who recommended that she get it. But if it had been decided that she couldn’t get it, that decision would still have been based on the recommendation of her paediatric specialiasts.

SuperGDZ

Usually it’s the other way round. They claim they skip vaccines because their kid had “a reaction” (details always unspecified) or has a “medical condition” (details always unspecified) because they just don’t have the spine to say that they don’t vaccinate because they don’t want to.

Mac Sherbert

Wasn’t there that medwife/doula that said something like that to cover that she hadn’t all her vaccines? She thought it fine to mislead because in her mind she had had all the “needed” vaccines?

KeeperOfTheBooks

Well, Dr. Sears has suggested that parents of non- or under-vaxxed kids not tell their playmates’ parents about it so that they get herd immunity benefits without scaring the herd. Classy, that. ‘Cause you know, my kids are so special everyone else should protect them so they needn’t risk the (nonexistent) dangers of the Evil Vaccines. ETA: just saw that Bofa posted the same thing below.

Zoey

I sincerely hope that people start to change their mind about vaccinating based on this Measles outbreak. Although, the hardcore anti-vaxers that I am unfortunate enough to have to associate with are busy hunkering down amidst all of the “persecution” they are facing from family, friends, and the media.

I’ve also seen a few that have been shielding their own ignorance and egos behind their “vaccine injured” (read autistic) children so that anyone that attempts to say anything back to them is automatically a villain that doesn’t believe in vaccine injuries. It’s pretty disgusting.

mostlyclueless

I rarely say this, but I think the situation calls for it:

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

Lisa C

I agree that being anti-vax is about ego but I also think it is about control. I think many parents fool themselves into thinking if they take certain steps they can prevent certain things from happening. I.E. If I breast feed exclusively until my child is a certain age they will be healthy and smart, If I don’t vaccinate my child won’t have autism, If I feed my child organic food and herbal supplements, my child will never become sick or if they become sick it will be mild and they won’t die. Even things that are less out there like if I read to my child every day they will be smarter (this one I agree with and practice myself but I also know that if my child has a genetic predisposition to low IQ it is unlikely that any amount of Berenstain Bears will change that).

I just think all parents have to accept that most things are luck of the genetic draw and we need to love our kids and teach / guide them as best we can but ultimately we have to let the chips fall where they may.

militarywife

Or if you are rich and white, you are clean. Only those dirty poor people and non-white people get diseases. While I loathe wishing pain and suffering on innocent children, there needs to be some form of disease that runs through affluent Malibu and/or Marin County to show them that diseases do not discriminate. Maybe that might wake some of them up.

Cobalt

“I just think all parents have to accept that most things are luck of the genetic draw and we need to love our kids and teach / guide them as best we can but ultimately we have to let the chips fall where they may.”

That’s it, really. You love and care for them how they are, not how you imagined them.

GiddyUpGo123

“Children today get about four times as many vaccines as the average 35-year-old did when we were kids”

Why is this such a beloved talking point for these people? I know, because of the whole “four times as many toxins” implication.

Personally, to me “four times as many vaccines” means four times as many diseases that I won’t have to worry so much about. That is a *good* thing, not a negative.

lilin

Also, now there are fourteen vaccinations to be gotten over six years. Fourteen.

“Four times as many” doesn’t mean much when thirty years ago there were three to four vaccinations in total.

Guest

30 years ago there were seven: measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and polio. Others were available, but those seven were the standard. So the “four times as many” is just more scare-tastic bullshit.

Roadstergal

I wonder what the total antigen count is for now vs 30 years ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s comparable.

The Bofa on the Sofa

I wonder what the total antigen count is for now vs 30 years ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s comparable.

It’s not comparable at all. The number of antigens in modern vaccines is something like a factor of 10 SMALLER than what it used to be. Or even bigger than that.

Total antigens in modern vaccines is something like 150. It used to be in the thousands!

Roadstergal

I’m not surprised by that either. 🙂 There’s been a lot of work on this shizz! That’s what should be trumpeted from the skies. “Look what a piddly little amount of antigen you get!” For those who are ‘too many, too soon,’ that should shut them right up. You’ll get thousands or more skinning your knee. And unlike vaccines, you’ll get them ‘directly into the bloodstream.’

EmbraceYourInnerCrone

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/124.full
I think Table 2, about half way through the article shows the difference starting about 100 years ago when just the smallpox shot was available. Smallpox was 200 proteins and the old whole-cell pertussis was on the order of 3000. Small pox is no longer given and the acellular pertussis has orders of magnitde less antigens. FYI I am in my fifties, I got both the small pox and old pertussis vaccines. Somehow my immune system managed just fine (although the small pox one HURT!)
Sorry for the data dump, my kid calls me Mommy the human encyclopedia…

Even my mom has mentioned that one, and I’ve explained to her that babies now are more protected. I asked her why she thinks its a problem, and she really had no answer. She wondered why the shots couldn’t be more spaced out, so I pointed out that the longer one goes unvaccinated, the higher the risk of catching the disease. Then I told her that the CDC, with scientists and doctors who know way more about it than I do, came up with the current vaccination schedule for a reason, so I follow their recommendations. My mom always made sure my sister and I were up-to-date with our vaccinations, including Hep B, which hadn’t come out until I was about to go to college, but she took me to get it. She’s never been anti-science or anti-vaccine, so I have no idea where she’s getting this idea about “too many shots at once” from.

Samantha06

The woo has infiltrated it’s nasty self everywhere! I can’t believe the number of people I work with who truly believe some the garbage. It’s scary, actually. I want to say to them, how can you believe this stuff is true when SCIENCE says it’s not? And these folks are educated, so they have no excuse!

Roadstergal

I just had a lunch where a co-worker was going on about how she does NOT want to be part of ‘testing’ of new vaccines (referring to post-marketing surveillance) and how the Gummint should Not Force People To Vaccinate, and although her kids are vaccinated, it doesn’t matter if other people don’t, because hers are safe. And I work in a science field. In an immunologically intense science field. Sigh.

Young CC Prof

So, no one should do postmarketing surveillance, just in case there is a rare or delayed side effect that didn’t crop up in the initial clinical trials?

Definitely. Better not to know than to be a guinea pig!

Roadstergal

I got the distinct feeling that the idea was that being a guinea pig was for ‘other people,’ and her kids should only get vaccines that already have a long safety record. It was a conversation I really wasn’t wanting to go into anymore, because I felt the risk-to-benefit ratio (aka the enlightenment-to-uncomfortable-work-environment ratio) was becoming unacceptable. Her kids are grown now anyway, but she has Very Strong Feelings about ‘vaccine freedom.’ (Of course, it was only because her kids were going to public schools at the time that they were ‘forced’ to get vaccines.)

Tina

Bet she’s first in line to buy the new TVs that monitor conversations though.

Samantha06

Good grief! I just don’t understand how an otherwise intelligent, reasonable person can be so stupid and ignorant about this! That conversation must have been particularly frustrating for you!

MegaMechaMeg

I am fully vaccinated as well and my mother is having a similar about face. Sometimes I just want to sit her down and ask her who is telling her these things and what kind of kids is she hanging out with to believe this utter nonsense.

JJ

My mother as well! My son had many vaccines in one day and had a reaction to the measles component (got sick for 5 days, ear infection, rash) and acted like it was because he had too many and she warned me not to do it. The pediatrician even said that the evidence does not show that having multiple vax in one visit to increase reactions.

My sister even went to a pediatrician that said there were too many vaccines given in one visit and to spread them out. The “too many too soon” idea is common even among mainstream people!

GiddyUpGo123

If it was safe to give all the vaccines at the same time, on the day of birth, I totally would have done it. I hated waiting until they got to that point where they were completely vaccinated, because I knew how many unvaccinated kids there were out there and I dreaded my babies coming into contact with one of them.

Cobalt

Yes! If I have any concerns about vaccines, it’s about not getting enough protection soon enough.

hehe

Aren’t you worried that that would interfere with breastfeeding and attachment?

Just kidding 🙂

Michele

Before #2 was born, the hospital maternity care coordinator asked about vaccines while we were doing my registration paperwork. I think my response of “Shoot him up with whatever you’ve got” alarmed her a little. She relaxed when I amended it to “We would like all age-appropriate recommended vaccines please.”

Medwife

I hear it from RNs. I just don’t get it. There’s no evidence that multiple vaccines at once are harmful. I like to get as many sticks out of the way at once as possible! God, otherwise I’d be bringing him in every month to get one. I’d worry about creating a white coat phobia.

Sue

If they are so worried about additives and preservatives (unrealistically so), would’t a combined vaccine be better than separate ones?

Stacy48918

Yes. Even in dogs some people want to “split” vaccines. Getting a single, multi-antigen vaccine is less likely to result in a reaction than several individual vaccines. Example DHPP with or without leptospirosis or individual parvo shots.

Cobalt

I would think the infection risk from multiple punctures is the biggest risk involved, and is easily reduced with combo shots.

Stacy48918

In dogs/cats at least, each vaccine is 1mL volume – regardless of the number of antigens. So giving DHLPP = 1mL; giving DHP + P + L as 3 separate shots = 3mL. So 3 times the volume and adjuvants.

There is an increased risk with punctures and cats though – they like to form soft tissue sarcomas at prior injection sites.

Ruby

Stacy,
I’m in my first year DVM program now, so I’m curious what you think:

I worked at a couple different clinics where the doctors preferred to split up the bacterial vaccines (not giving lepto and lyme on the same day) because they found an increase in adverse reactions when they did. So the first time might be rabies-lyme and then the next time it would be lepto + DA2PPV. What’s your opinion on this?

Stacy48918

I think it’s shooting yourself in the foot, compliance-wise. I have seen very few vaccine reactions. Yes, several puffy faces, hives, etc. but only 2 true anaphylactic type reactions. And while it’s certainly not comforting to the owners, its rare for dogs to die, even from an anaphylactic vaccine reaction.

Asking an owner to come twice for vaccines, especially if you are just starting the series and have boosters too might (possibly) decrease reactions but it’s going to increase non-compliance and folks that simply don’t come back, forget, reschedule, etc.

They should actually track it, not just rely on memory. Those 2 cases REALLY stand out in my mind, but when I think of the vast number of dogs I’ve vaccinated they are in the stark minority. There probably aren’t as many reactions as they think, and certainly not serious ones. If it’s REALLY a documented, verifiable problem, they need to change suppliers. Also, they should be reporting to the manufacturer and the government every time there is a reaction.

Ruby

Oops, sorry, I should have mentioned these were mild reactions, as reported by owners, not true anaphylaxis.

When I worked there we would call the clients the day after their appointments to ask how to pet was doing after vaccines, and then everything got charted.

Apparently they were getting a lot of cases of diarrhea, soreness, etc., a couple of which were serious enough to report to the vaccine companies and give the dogs extra drugs for inflammation and pain (which the companies reimbursed them for).

For the compliance thing, they made them pay for it all up front and then followed up with reminders. As far as I know, it was successful.. I can see how that would be a concern though. I remember we had one client who was confused as to why his pup needed to keep come back for the same vx- got really angry about it on the phone, too..

Thanks for your reply- I was curious to see if you’d had any similar experiences. I’m glad to hear that the anaphylaxis is so rare, it must be super scary when it happens!

militarywife

Yes and thank God! Many more diseases prevented and less “toxins” nowadays then when I was getting my shots in the early 80s.

Amy Tuteur, MD

That’s like complaining about airbags because cars used to have only two airbags and now some have as many as 7.

anon13

Cars used to have ZERO airbags, and before that, zero seat belts!

Cobalt

And the change had to be legislated, voluntary manufacturer compliance wasn’t sufficient.

The Bofa on the Sofa

So I remember when I was young, long before the days of seatbelt laws and the whatnot, my mom came to pick me up at the roller skating rink, and drove my aunt’s car, which actually had a “seatbelt” reminder (ding ding!) that went off if you didn’t have your seatbelt on. Well, it didn’t need to be on, it was just that the seatbelt had to be pulled out.

So my mom, instead of just putting the frickin thing on, drove down the road holding the seatbelt pulled out just enough to keep the reminder from going off.

This is the extents that we (I won’t claim to be a saint) went through to avoid putting our seatbelts on back then.

This is what I think of whenever I hear anyone suggest that car makers would put seatbelts in a free market.

No. It was not until seatbelt laws showed up that most people started wearing them. My old baseball coach made us put our seatbelts on when he drove us home, but he was the only person I knew that used seatbelts before the law kicked in.

But it still gets me that my mom preferred to drive one handed, holding the seatbelt than to put the damn thing on.

But that’s the way we did it back then.

nomofear

Sadly I still know people that do the same as your mom. Today. In modern times. I ask them if they have enough life insurance to cover their families’ futures, including to fund the vegetative-state scenario that they could end up in? but this is the deep south I’m in, so, freedom…

Roadstergal

I’m sure there’s a term for it, but there’s this idea that if doing X is what people expect me to do, and doing X is the thing that would actually be best for me in this situation – I’m going to actually do Y, to show that I have free will.

GiddyUpGo123

When I was a teenager, I remember when friends of mine would find some new and obscure band and go on and on about how awesome they were, right up until they became popular. Then, they would completely stop listening to that band because they “sold out.”

I think people have this deep need to be seen as being outside of mainstream, of finding that one thing that everyone else is too stupid to appreciate or understand. It really is an ego thing, “I’m more enlightened than everyone else because everyone else listens to [popular band] and I’m the only one smart enough to know that [obscure band] makes better music.” Or, “I’m more enlightened than everyone else because everyone else vaccinates their kids, and I’m the only one smart enough to know that being unvaccinated is healthier.”

Roadstergal

Yeah, it’s so bizarre. I have seen seatbelt-defeating stratagems such as Bofa describes before. “Ha, other people put on seatbelts, and they have an annoying little chime to remind you to – but I’m so smart, I defeated the chime without putting the belt on!”

Young CC Prof

“Why did the hipster burn his mouth eating pizza?”

“He was eating it before it was cool.”

Cobalt

The free American spirit.

Nick Sanders

“Idiocy”

Young CC Prof

I don’t remember anyone ever doing that in my family, but then my mother worked in the auto insurance industry, and knew exactly why Congress forced car companies to add seatbelts and later, airbags. In fact, she’s mentioned a couple times that it’s inexcusable how long it took for the airbag laws to get passed, that the technology to make airbags work and the evidence that it was a good idea were all available in the 70s.

I remember my dad going through a phase when I was a kid where we weren’t *aallowed* to wear lap belts. He told us we’d be paralyzed in a car wreck. I vividly remember surreptitiously sneaking my seat belt on, and at least told him I’d rather be paralyzed than dead. I was about 10? It was a year or two before shoulder belts became mandatory in the back seat.

Tina

I wonder if she’d admit to it now. My parents never bother with siblings for my siblings and me, but if you ask them now they’ll swear that they never drove us anywhere without seatbelts.

The Bofa on the Sofa

I wonder if she’d admit to it now.

I would doubt that she would remember it, but she wouldn’t deny it. She knows we did stupid things back then.

Petanque

My parents-in-law still do that in 2015! They really do think they’re “sticking it to the nanny state”.
Sigh.

The Bofa on the Sofa

She didn’t do it to stick it to the nanny state, but because it was annoying and she didn’t want to wear the seatbelt.

Remember, there were no laws about it at the time. The car manufacturer had just added it as a feature.

SporkParade

Wouldn’t it have been easier to just buckle the seat belt and then sit on top of it? That’s what my mother-in-law does in the car with the dogs, since their weight triggers the dinging.

The Bofa on the Sofa

It wasn’t our car

realitycheque

I once shared a taxi with an acquaintance while staying in Bangkok, and as I went to put my seatbelt on she insisted, “Oh, don’t worry about that! You don’t have to wear seatbelts over here!!”. I looked at her like she was crazy and put it on anyway. I don’t wear my seatbelt because of the law, I wear it because I prefer to avoid flying through the windshield in the event of a collision.

I will never understand some people.

Petanque

Those cars were much closer to Nature so I guess they were probably really safer. Who knows what those airbags really contain!!

Young CC Prof

Explosives, actually. Air alone can’t inflate them fast enough.

JJ

I don’t get it either. What is the correct amount of disease to suffer from?

I am convinced crunchy types hate progress.

monojo

They do! It’s all about looking backwards to a glorious past, before GMOs and vaccines and toxins and c-sections were everywhere, and things were more simple and pure. Of course they don’t look at the past realistically, and they never admit that they are actually afraid of a future that they don’t understand. It drives me crazy when people romanticize the past.

Mike

Mayim has now responded: “honestly, people. do your research. do what’s right for you. let me live my life and you live yours. no one gets to know the timeline of my kids’ medical appointments because they are not celebrities and they are not your property. put me on the altar if you have nothing better to do today, but just be happy with your decisions and leave my kids alone. my job is not in jeopardy. everything is fine, except in the clearly supportive and loving world of social media and gossip. have a fantastic day everyone.”

lilin

Yeah, people only get to know how long her kids were breastfed, where they sleep, how long they are held during the day, and how they manage with “elimination communication.” They don’t need to know her kids vaccination schedule.

The Bofa on the Sofa

Exactly.

SHE was the one who shoved her kids in our faces with her stupid book. So “leave my kids out of it” doesn’t work.

Roadstergal

It’s just so jaw-droppingly infantile. “Look at mee! Pay attention to meee and my awesome parenting decisions that are better than yours! Why are you challenging my parenting decisions? Stop being so meeen and poking into my life!”

I think ‘have a fantastic day’ means ‘fuck you all’ in Bialik.

Samantha06

“I think ‘have a fantastic day’ means ‘fuck you all’ in Bialik.”

If she had added “precious” in there somewhere, there would have been no doubt she was saying “fuck you.”!! lol!

Liz Leyden

She should’ve clarified by adding “Bless your heart!”

Samantha06

Yes! That would have been perfect!

Liz Leyden

LOOK AT MEEE! LOOK AT MEEE! LOOK AT MEEE! HOW DARE YOU LOOK AT MEEE!

Klain

My kids say this. I will be busy doing something and letting the kids be. They will then call me to explicitly tell me NOT to look at what they are doing! Then why call me?

Young CC Prof

I don’t think too many people really care about her family’s medical decisions. They do care that she uses the platform of her celebrity to take a stand on medical questions, especially when it runs completely counter to expert consensus.

The Bofa on the Sofa

Nope, this doesn’t work.

SHE thinks we are supposed to care about her parenting decisions so much that she wrote a book telling us all about her parenting decisions. But suddenly when her parenting decisions are questionable, she is going to hide behind “it’s my family leave us alone”? Nuh-uh

Monica

Don’t be pointing your fingers at my children, they are not to be in the lime light unless I put them there so I can stay relevant. Make up your mind, you put your children and your parenting out there and then when there’s a negative fall out you’re like okay I take it all back stop shining that light on me. We only have your words to go by, so in 2009 your kids were unvaccinated and 6 years later they are, but don’t dare ask to what extent because that’s none of your business. You opened that can of worms, no one else did.

AL

Well if she had kept her kids out of the limelight and her mouth shut from the beginning none of this would be happening.

just me

Plus she wrote and made $$$ off her parenting book. I think her vax schedule is fair game.

Cobalt

With her kids on the cover! Or at least the side of their heads.

Cobalt

With her kids on the cover! Or at least the sides of their heads.

Amy M

I see the job thing in there. I was wondering if she was pressured from her employers or coworkers to stop being a twit and get her damn kids vaccinated.

Not to mention it isn’t about her kids. It’s about HER. Her choices, her words, her activism. Reframing it that we’re dragging her kids into the spotlight is just to try and guilt people into looking the other way from her hipocracy and the fact that she’s flat out wrong.

yugaya

I think TFB complained along the same lines recently – once they’ve made enough money they all just want to be left alone to live their lives, of which public knows because well, they turned it into a business, this constant feed of their lives to the public.

Squillo

“[D]o what’s right for you. let me live my life and you live yours.”

But buy my book to find out what’s right for you.

lilin

Some are going to retreat partially – Delayed vaccination. Vaccination has minimal benefits. Vaccination is “linked” to various diseases. – and then come back when the public memory of this fades.

But yes, a lot of the antivaxxers are going to back down. In part because, before, the “my child has autism because of vaccines” was a story, and now “my child has the measles because of idiots who think vaccines cause autism” is the story. Mainstream news organizations have an actual crisis to hold up as a way of dismissing antivaxxers, not just nebulous “science,” which never really makes headlines.

But it isn’t going to fade. The genie’s out of the bottle. There are enough virus carriers out there to keep the disease going–possibly at a low level, so that new cases are diagnosed in the hundreds each year instead of huge epidemics, but there’s always going to be someone vulnerable who will unwittingly be exposed to keep it from dying out.

Cobalt

I think you’re underestimating the distractability of the average American.

thea

I hold Drs Sear & Gordon much more accountable. I like to bang the drum early & often that they ought to lose accreditation or be used for their dirty hands in this mess.

This current outbreak has a 30% hospitalization rate and they have the nerve to continue to lie that measlesis harmless.

Celebrity support of vaccine refusal is bad but pediatric support is unconscionable

Young CC Prof

There should indeed be a special level of hell for quacks who graduated medical school.

Samantha06

Aviva Romm is a prime example..

Bugsy

Wait, she was an anti-vax (or pro vax-choice) advocate who was secretly vaccinating her own children?

I hate hypocrisy. Parents who brag about their parenting decisions while not actually following them (i.e.: we’re a no-TV and anti-screen family, look how awesome we are. (Just don’t come by while our kids are happily ingesting Netflix and YouTube…)) drive me nuts.

Parenting fail, Mayim.

attitude devant

I don’t think she vaccinated then, and I don’t think she vaccinates now. She’s just doing PR.

Keep talking Mayim. The people who watch your show are not dumb, and we see right through you. My opinion of you falls daily.

Name

I don’t believe her either. She apparently had to vax them for a trip to Israel, but i don’t think she had the get any other vaccines than that.

attitude devant

I confidently look forward in 20 years or so to a trashy tell-all written by one of her kids, in the style of Mommie Dearest.

Poogles

“I don’t think she vaccinated then, and I don’t think she vaccinates now.”

I honestly wonder if she is simply using the fact that she gave her children the polio vaccine to claim she is not anti-vaccine and that her children are “vaccinated”. Technically, she’s not lying – she can’t be “anti” something she’s used/done (even if only once) and her children are “vaccinated” (even if only for polio).

The Bofa on the Sofa

See Orac’s post yesterday. He talks about this all the time. Anti-vaxxers always claim they aren’t anti-vax. Jebus louwegebus, Jenny McCarthy friggin claimed that she wasn’t anti-vax.

It’s the old, “I’m not anti-vax, but…” followed by a whole string of anti-vax tropes.

I always liken it to Stewie from Family Guy, when he said, about Lois, “It’s not that I want to ‘kill’ her, it’s just that I want her to be dead and I want to be the one who makes her that way.”

Samantha06

I love Family Guy..

Are you nuts

I hope you’re right, but I’m afraid in a few weeks it will be business as usual. I read just this morning someone claiming that “only 100 people have been infected of the 15 million people who visited Disney Land last year.” Never mind that using the entire year’s population is inappropriate… It never occurs to these people that “only” 100 were infected because overall vaccination rates are still very high. I’d hate to think what this would look like if vaccination rates were even a few percentage points lower.

I do think that some people who were on the fence about vaccines may take this opportunity to get their kids vaccinated. The most hard core won’t change their tune, but I hope there will be some people on the fence who come around.

Guest

But 15 million don’t visit in a single day. Let’s assume it is 15m/year, so average 40,000-45,000/day. In one day, 100+ people were infected out of the 40-45,000 visitors that day. That is roughly 0.2-0.3% of that day’s visitors. And yes, I know all 100 weren’t at Disney that day. But still…

Young CC Prof

I’ve figured out what annoys me about this argument.

It is reasonable to estimate your risk of dying in a car accident by looking at how many people in your state died in car accidents last year, since the risk of car accident remains fairly stable (and in fact slowly decreases) over time.

Contagious diseases don’t remain stable over time. Complication and death per so many cases, yes, but the number of cases do not.

Mel

From what I’ve seen on my completely non-random Facebook feed, most of my anti-vaxx acquaintances have “reconsidered” more from the ego blow of wonderful pieces of satire like “Vaccines are the reason my cat has autism” and “I’m an anti-braker. Don’t judge me!” than the suffering of infants who died of whooping cough or families who went through weeks of measles.

Part of me feels mad – babies lives matter.

Part of me feel relieved – may not be for the right reason, but shit, if you are that ego-driven, I know how to change your mind.

Young CC Prof

You know what else I think is different about this outbreak? The victims are talking. On Facebook, on blogs, on the actual TV news, human beings with names and faces are talking about what the measles is doing to them right now. It’s not “A ten month old in the Los Angeles area,” it’s a family.

They talk about the fear of knowing the child has been exposed, watching day after day for the symptoms. About the expense of quarantine. About watching your child in the hospital.

I think that’s what’s making it so hard to ignore, that’s why this outbreak has people flat-out angry.

EmbraceYourInnerCrone

Have you looked at the latest reviews for the truly awful book “Melanie’s Marvelous Measles” on Amazon? One especially enterprising person put up a list of other(fake) book titles in the same series. The really awful thing about the book(other than the obvious) is that the author lifted the title from one of Roald Dahl’s books…

The Bofa on the Sofa

Oh for sure, she just used the “delayed schedule” so now her kids finally have their shots.

But that whole “we are a non-vaccinating family” statement is pretty damning.

EmbraceYourInnerCrone

IDK if she does a spaced out schedule but I remember she said on her Howard Stern interview that she got her kids the polio vax when she took them to Israel. So she’s for vax in when there’s a higher chance of her kids getting sick but not to protect those who can’t be vaxxed.

That makes me want to laugh. There are some disease that one might pick up more easily in Israel than in the US, but polio isn’t one of them. There was a small outbreak of polio in the Fifties and as a result Israelis areVERY careful to get polio immunization and the Ministry of Health checks places where the virus might flourish frequently.

Kerlyssa

Wild polio has been detected in Israeli sewage, and cases exist in nearby countries like Syria. It is not a threat to scoff at.

That’s precisely my point. The wild polio virus was found in the sewage in a Beduin village because the Health Ministry routinely monitors such things. There hasn’t been a single case in Israel for 50 years. When the virus was found, it was announced on TV, and parents were encouraged to make sure their children were up to date with immunization [which is free]. Israelis in general are very pro-vaxx.

Heaven only knows what is happening in Syria. Those Syrians who are currently getting health care in Israel [there is a field hospital on the Golan Heights], are being given all necessary immunizations before discharge, but it would not surprise me one bit if we hear of actual cases of polio there during the summer–the water and sewage treatment infrastructure has been totally destroyed in a number of towns.

SporkParade

It amazes me that anyone can look at what happened in 2013 in Israel with polio and doubt that herd immunity works. It is also a constant source of embarassment to me that the primary source of anti-vax sentiment in Israel is from Americans who moved here. :/

Kelly

Do you have to have had your polio vaccination in order to enter Israel?

Well, there you go. Only because she had to do it did she let her precious pure kids get vaccinated. She is insane.

Amy Tuteur, MD

Dr. Amy Tuteur is an obstetrician gynecologist. She received her undergraduate degree from Harvard College in 1979 and her medical degree from Boston University School of Medicine in 1984. Dr. Tuteur is a former clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School. She left the practice of medicine to raise her four children. Her book, Push Back: Guilt in the Age of Natural Parenting (HarperCollins) was published in 2016. She can be reached at DrAmy5 at aol dot com...
More